About Matthew (Okay - Let me toot my horn)

[mattskramer]

I'm a relatively easygoing individualist. I think that the only thing that I don't tolerate well is intolerance. I basically believe that people (particularly adults) should be free to do as they please as long as they don't interfere with the freedoms of others. Government should do little more than punish those who commit fraud and violence against others.

Along these lines, I support smaller government. I'm particularly opposed on "nanny-style" regulations and agencies. (FDA, OSHA, etc.) People should, in general, be free to do as they please. Yet, they must also personally accept the consequences of the decisions that they make. I support deregulation (as do many conservative). Yet, I also support the legalization of drugs, prostitution, and gambling (as do many liberals). Again, and with little exception, I think on an individualist level and believe that people should be more free than they are today.

 

[DKSuddeth]

I think that the only thing that I don't tolerate well is intolerance.

how's that for Irony?

 

[Big D]

Am I free to hire anyone I want at my company?
Or rent to anyone I want at my apartments?

 

[eric]

I'm particularly opposed on "nanny-style" regulations and agencies. (FDA, OSHA, etc.)

Matt, I am a conservative and also am opposed to over-regulation and large government, though I do think that the two agencies you brought up are necessary. We must assure the safety of our food and medicines and set certain standards which they must meet for sale to the public. Industry self-regulation just can not be trusted when it comes to these health and safety issues !

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by mattskramer
I'm a relatively easygoing individualist. I think that the only thing that I don't tolerate well is intolerance. I basically believe that people (particularly adults) should be free to do as they please as long as they don't interfere with the freedoms of others. Government should do little more than punish those who commit fraud and violence against others.

Along these lines, I support smaller government. I'm particularly opposed on "nanny-style" regulations and agencies. (FDA, OSHA, etc.) People should, in general, be free to do as they please. Yet, they must also personally accept the consequences of the decisions that they make. I support deregulation (as do many conservative). Yet, I also support the legalization of drugs, prostitution, and gambling (as do many liberals). Again, and with little exception, I think on an individualist level and believe that people should be more free than they are today.

I'm a complete conservative when it comes to government as well. I don't think 7/8ths of the government should exist. As far as I'm concerned the only responsibility that government has is to ensure that people don't commit murder or otherwise harm people, all deaings are fair and equitable and, of course, the defense of the nation. All that other crap is sucking what's good out of this country.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Moi
I'm a complete conservative when it comes to government as well. I don't think 7/8ths of the government should exist. As far as I'm concerned the only responsibility that government has is to ensure that people don't commit murder or otherwise harm people, all deaings are fair and equitable and, of course, the defense of the nation. All that other crap is sucking what's good out of this country.

I keep having this fantasy that a conservative supreme court is going to some day pass a law instantly demanding that government be reduced to it's constitutionally mandated size. My secret right wing judicial activism, heee heee.

 

[William Joyce]

It's come before them, in the case of U.S. v. Lopez. But they choked, the wusses. I think we're like an overbloated tick here. We simply won't disengage and shrink back down to size. Government size is a ratchet --- it only goes in one direction, and that's up. Remember ol' Ronnie Reagan, the great conservative hero? Government got BIGGER under him. We're going to explode, and new little pieces will pick up and start doing their own thing.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
I keep having this fantasy that a conservative supreme court is going to some day pass a law instantly demanding that government be reduced to it's constitutionally mandated size. My secret right wing judicial activism, heee heee.

How is that activism? Fantasy and activism are two different things.

 

[acludem]

Having dealt with both food safety and workplace safety issues both the FDA and OSHA are absolutely necessary. The FDA is our main defense against contaminated food and dangerous medicines. OSHA regulations, when followed, prevent numerous accidents and injuries (My place of work was injury free for 2 1/2 years while I was safety coordinator).

acludem

 

[mattskramer]

Originally posted by Big D
Am I free to hire anyone I want at my company?
Or rent to anyone I want at my apartments?

Have you checked with the EEOC and made sure that your hiring practices and general racial make-up of your employees fit their standard?

 

[mattskramer]

Originally posted by eric
Matt, I am a conservative and also am opposed to over-regulation and large government, though I do think that the two agencies you brought up are necessary. We must assure the safety of our food and medicines and set certain standards which they must meet for sale to the public. Industry self-regulation just can not be trusted when it comes to these health and safety issues !

Thalidomide tragedy was the worst drug disaster in modern history. It affected 10,000 children. Yet The FDA's 3-year delay in introducing propranolol cost 30,000 lives. On average, it can be reasoned that, when the FDA delays lifesaving drugs, we have the equivalent of three thalidomide tragedies. Delays caused by FDA cost more lives than it save. For the terminally ill, denying access to drugs that could potentially save, or at least prolong their lives, is especially cruel.

Still concerned about the possibility of bad drugs getting away? Okay. Then let the FDA "stamp of approval" be an option. Those patients that are willing to take "unproved" drugs should be free to do so. Those that want the FDA approved drugs may also get those.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by acludem
Having dealt with both food safety and workplace safety issues both the FDA and OSHA are absolutely necessary. The FDA is our main defense against contaminated food and dangerous medicines. OSHA regulations, when followed, prevent numerous accidents and injuries (My place of work was injury free for 2 1/2 years while I was safety coordinator).

acludem

Seriously, get rid of the FDA and OSHA?

So we can go to the grocery store and take our chances like a tourist looking for a burrito in the slums of Mexico City?

Not to knock Mexico, fill-in any place where health/food safety standards are a bit.. um..sub-par.

I mean, aren't the FDA folks the ones protecting us from Mad Cows?

 

[mattskramer]

Government agencies can be just as corrupt as private businesses. I guess those businesses that want to pay more for the government paperwork can apply to get their stuff stamped with government approval. Consumers can then pay the extra money (cost is ultimately passed down to the ultimate consumer) for the government approved products. Even if we were to do away with government approval agencies, with would not end "approval organizations". Have you heard of "Consumer Reports" or "Good Housekeeping".

I could post many stories about government being asleep at the wheel when it comes to baby-sitting American individuals and businesses. Do you remember the Firestone tire incident. A disproportionate number of exploding tires were from Firestone. This finding was not made by government but by a private insurance firm.

Remember when government mandated that cars have airbags. Many children were damaged by passenger airbags before government adjusted its mandate.

Then there is the kangaroo rat, a member of the "Endangered Species List". Los Angeles wildfires destroyed roughly 29 homes largely because homeowners had been forbidden to plow firebreaks around their houses. This is because the kangaroo rat, makes its shallow burrows in sandy soils, rendering it vulnerable to plowing or disking.

Without meaning to sound too insulting, let me say - No thanks. You can rely on government agencies, rules, and regulations to baby-sit you. I prefer to think for myself and accept the consequences for the choices I make.

 

[Big D]

Originally posted by mattskramer
Have you checked with the EEOC and made sure that your hiring practices and general racial make-up of your employees fit their standard?

No, I was thinking because it is my company and my apartments I could maybe hire and rent to who ever I wanted.

Would you please "tolerate" that?

 

[mattskramer]

Originally posted by Big D
No, I was thinking because it is my company and my apartments I could maybe hire and rent to who ever I wanted.

Would you please "tolerate" that?

Heck yeah. If you just want to hire only blonde-hair, blue-eyed, white skinned men and they want to work for you, I don't care. It is government that might object.

I might not have made my comment about "tolerate" clear. It is the but-in-skies I have a difficult time tolerating...it is those who poke their noses into the lives of others who are not committing unconsensual violence and fraud. As long as you don't engage in fraud against your employees or tenants...and as long as you don't become violent against your tenants, I don't give a darn what you do.

 

[eric]

Even if we were to do away with government approval agencies, with would not end "approval organizations". Have you heard of "Consumer Reports" or "Good Housekeeping".

Yes Matt, I have. My company has also paid for approvals and good reviews. So much for unbiased approvals and ratings.

Lets get real for a moment, can you imagine if there was no FDA, how do you know the next time you take a cold medication you are not swallowing a poision from a lack of safety controlls and testing. When people start dying ?

We need to use common sense when we speak of regulation/de-regulation.

 

[Moi]

I'm just not sure the role of the government is to ensure that everything we eat and where we work is safe. I can't figure out how they have the authority to state that they are going to coddle the populaton.

Under capitalism and a hire by will society that those who did not provide a good, safe product or pay fair wages and protect their employees would just cease to exist. It's the responsibility of the consumer and citizen, not the federal government.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Moi
I'm just not sure the role of the government is to ensure that everything we eat and where we work is safe. I can't figure out how they have the authority to state that they are going to coddle the populaton.

Under capitalism and a hire by will society that those who did not provide a good, safe product or pay fair wages and protect their employees would just cease to exist. It's the responsibility of the consumer and citizen, not the federal government.

What about the accreditation of physicians? Do you want to personally ask some quack 21 questions to determine if you should let them operate on you? Do you have staff to verify all his transcripts? Or are you just going to take his word?

I used to be pure libertarian. It's just not feasible, kind of like socialism. Don't get me wrong, our government is currently doing WAY too much for us, and I still maintain my fanstasy of wishing for the supreme court to declare vast chunks of the fed unconstitutional; I think the pure libertarian view is just a bit too spartan. Though I still think it's the perfect form of government for the dreamtime. I guess this also makes me a "neocon".


On the drug issue, weed should be legal, but I just don't think crack should, it's too damaging to learn about through trial and error. But crackheads shouldn't be treated like violent criminals. They should be treated like possibly slightly fucked up people addicted to a very destructive drug.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

"Which medical school did you attend?"

"Well, it's bigger than a breadbox."

 

[eric]

Under capitalism and a hire by will society that those who did not provide a good, safe product or pay fair wages and protect their employees would just cease to exist.

What about the people who get hurt in the meantime while the consumer is figuring it all out ? That is my problem. I don't want to have to guess on the safety of a medication. No system is perfect, but ours does work.

Hey I am cutting my own throat here, I own shares in Pharm. companies and I would love to see the FDA approval process disappear from a standpoint of net profits, but I just think it would do more harm than good !