1 Small example of Government Regulation ******* a little guy....Me!

[daveman]

Thank you, Dave, for another astonishingly profound contribution.

Oooh. Somebody doesn't like being mocked.

Yes Hank Hill, you've hurt me deeply.

Say, did you ever answer the question someone asked about your first post in this thread? Do you consider it an astonishingly profound contribution?

 

[daveman]

Yes Hank Hill, you've hurt me deeply.

Can I just get some assistance to understand your issue. Your first post in this comment added what exactly to the thread?

I suggest you might what to check out the definition of 'hypocrisy', Cuyo.

Nothing + Nothing makes nothing. My dog likes dog biscuits. Do you find that intuitive? The value of this whiny OP thread is neither increased nor decreased by adding that bit of information.

Ahhh. So you're free to shit in a thread, but all my posts have to be "astonishingly profound contributions".

Like I said...double standards.

 

[Sallow]

Unfortunately, this sums up reality fairly well for today.

Anarchy however, is not the answer - there is a place for government, a required place if we want to maintain the lifestyle Americans are accustomed to. The answer begins with simplification of the tax code. Even much of the hated 'regulation' bitched about so eloquently here can be traced back to congress taking upon themselves the power to tax you differently from me, a power NOT given to them by our constitution.

Simple taxes & regulation = fair taxes and regulation.

Fair taxes, a budget balanced by law and then build a government and society our children can be proud of and receive from us with thanks and hope instead of fear and resentment.

I have never advocated getting rid of government, I just want it small enough that it does not create regulations just to justify its existence.

Me too.

Fair taxes, budget balanced by law, THEN build a government.

Generally not how it works.

But feel free to try your experiment on any one of these wonderful places!

Islands for Sale, Private Islands, Luxury Real Estate

 

[AVG-JOE]

I have never advocated getting rid of government, I just want it small enough that it does not create regulations just to justify its existence.

Me too.

Fair taxes, budget balanced by law, THEN build a government.

Generally not how it works.

But feel free to try your experiment on any one of these wonderful places!

Islands for Sale, Private Islands, Luxury Real Estate

My job in this forum is not to point out the obvious - there are plenty of parrots doing that. My job is to point to the future.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, your contemporary 'Mudwhistle' is arguing that the insurance company will have to pay out the $1.5M in punitive damages, hence the only winners are the lawyer for the plaintiff, and of course the actual plaintiff.

You really have no idea how insurance and lawyers work, do you. They settle cases rather than go to court and risk punitive damages, and they do this even when the fault clearly lies with someone other than the party they insure. That is because they take the advice of lawyers who like to tell them about all the big scary jury verdicts, while they actually encourage the same juries to give those verdicts.

Don't get me wrong, it is not the same lawyers, but they all belong to the same clubs. They routinely jump from defending insurance companies to suing them, and then back to defending them. They get their big money off the big cases where they sue them, which is why they always lobby against tort reform, even when they work for people that would directly benefit from it.

Oh gosh no, I wouldn't know anything about that............

It's a zero sum game. When the insurance company "wins," the lawyer "loses." Arguing that they are somehow in cahoots is obscenely ridiculous.

The lawyer always wins, even when the insurance company wins.

 

[Charles_Main]

Friend, I'm in one of the most heavily regulated businesses out there. I had a gun salesman, yes, a man who sold live firearms, who was a customer tell me he is not nearly as regulated as we are. So I know it's a pain in the ass. And I'm inspected, unannounced, by the feds, specifically APHIS.

HOWEVER - I do indeed tire of "WAAAAAAAAHHHH! SOMETHING'S NOT GOING RIGHT! IT MUST BE THE GOVERNMENT'S FAULT!"

It's the same rules for everyone. Structure it into your price schedule and move on. The government is not a big boogeyman dispatched to get just you.

That is exactly the problem with Big Government. Same rules for everyone. Whether your a big company or small you need to carry the same coverage. If I structure it into my price schedule I would have to charge to much to compete with the bigger guys who can do more volume than me. Why is it so hard for government not to have one size fits all rules. Why can I not buy Insurance That is enough to Cover the homes I work on, and not have to buy 2 to 3 Times as much as I need just because government tells me to.

It's the same thing with Obamacare. Instead of people getting the coverage the need, Like younger people who really only need catastrophic Care coverage. They want to force everyone to pay for the same amount of coverage whether they are going to need it or not.

10 Years ago here in Michigan You could buy insurance based on what you needed not on some arbitrary amount the government decided. It is exactly things like this that stand in the way of small business. Which is exactly what I am trying to be. However when I have to pay so much in Insurance costs that I would need to do about 3 times as much work a month as I can do alone. It means I can't start off small like I did last time. That in order to make it I would need at least 2 Employees right away, and take on all the costs associated with that right off the bat. Just to be able to do enough work to justify the Monthly Insurance costs.

It's just stupid, and just one small example of how well intended government regulations can stifle our economy in ways you do not even think about.

Apples and oranges..but do go on.

But do you think that you shouldn't have to carry insurance?

Of course I should have to carry insurance, But I should be able to tailor my coverage to my business and not be mandated to buy 3 times as much coverage as I could possibly ever need. Just like you used to be able to do, in this state. Before we had 12 Years of a democrat Governor.

 

[Greenbeard]

It's the same thing with Obamacare. Instead of people getting the coverage the need, Like younger people who really only need catastrophic Care coverage. They want to force everyone to pay for the same amount of coverage whether they are going to need it or not.

Young people can choose to just buy catastrophic coverage under that law. But don't let that get in the way of your rant.

 

[Ravi]

That is exactly the problem with Big Government. Same rules for everyone. Whether your a big company or small you need to carry the same coverage. If I structure it into my price schedule I would have to charge to much to compete with the bigger guys who can do more volume than me. Why is it so hard for government not to have one size fits all rules. Why can I not buy Insurance That is enough to Cover the homes I work on, and not have to buy 2 to 3 Times as much as I need just because government tells me to.

It's the same thing with Obamacare. Instead of people getting the coverage the need, Like younger people who really only need catastrophic Care coverage. They want to force everyone to pay for the same amount of coverage whether they are going to need it or not.

10 Years ago here in Michigan You could buy insurance based on what you needed not on some arbitrary amount the government decided. It is exactly things like this that stand in the way of small business. Which is exactly what I am trying to be. However when I have to pay so much in Insurance costs that I would need to do about 3 times as much work a month as I can do alone. It means I can't start off small like I did last time. That in order to make it I would need at least 2 Employees right away, and take on all the costs associated with that right off the bat. Just to be able to do enough work to justify the Monthly Insurance costs.

It's just stupid, and just one small example of how well intended government regulations can stifle our economy in ways you do not even think about.

Apples and oranges..but do go on.

But do you think that you shouldn't have to carry insurance?

Of course I should have to carry insurance, But I should be able to tailor my coverage to my business and not be mandated to buy 3 times as much coverage as I could possibly ever need. Just like you used to be able to do, in this state. Before we had 12 Years of a democrat Governor.

I'd like to see where your insurance requirements are described, because I sure as hell can't find them.

It is my experience that some of my clients require insurance and some of them never ask for it. Some want 1 million coverage and some want 3 million coverage.

I am not convinced that you know what you're talking about.

 

[Cuyo]

You really have no idea how insurance and lawyers work, do you. They settle cases rather than go to court and risk punitive damages, and they do this even when the fault clearly lies with someone other than the party they insure. That is because they take the advice of lawyers who like to tell them about all the big scary jury verdicts, while they actually encourage the same juries to give those verdicts.

Don't get me wrong, it is not the same lawyers, but they all belong to the same clubs. They routinely jump from defending insurance companies to suing them, and then back to defending them. They get their big money off the big cases where they sue them, which is why they always lobby against tort reform, even when they work for people that would directly benefit from it.

Oh gosh no, I wouldn't know anything about that............

It's a zero sum game. When the insurance company "wins," the lawyer "loses." Arguing that they are somehow in cahoots is obscenely ridiculous.

The lawyer always wins, even when the insurance company wins.

It's not a conspiracy, Oddball.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I can't believe repubs are crying about big business. I though they were your friends and now I see that they are the maaaan trying to hold you down.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh gosh no, I wouldn't know anything about that............

It's a zero sum game. When the insurance company "wins," the lawyer "loses." Arguing that they are somehow in cahoots is obscenely ridiculous.

The lawyer always wins, even when the insurance company wins.

It's not a conspiracy, Oddball.

Did I say it was a conspiracy? I just pointed out the truth, the lawyer always wins. I will admit it that it looks like a conspiracy, but that does not make it one.

 

[bripat9643]

If you only had .25 mil in liability ins would you only work on houses valued at 250k or less?

How much damage to you imagine a roofer can do to a house, short of setting it on fire, that is?

At worst, he can put on the roof wrong. That might mean $10,000 to do it over again.

$1.5 million is utterly absurd.

 

[IndependntLogic]

So, Here are the Basics. I live in Michigan. For the last 25 Years I have worked in the Residential New Construction and Home Improvement Repair Industry in one way or another.

About 15 Years ago I actually ran my own company doing roofing and siding and did pretty well.

Well for Personal Reasons I have for most of the last 10 Years been working for other people rather than myself. However now with the economy the way it is. I have been trying to start up my own Roofing Company again. Believe it or not, while new construction is slow, the home Improvement Industry is doing well. People unable to move are instead putting money into their existing homes.

Well anyways, As a roofer you are required by law to carry certain amounts of Insurance. Both to cover you and any workers when working on someones home, and here where I live I find out that unlike 10 years ago. I now have no choice and have to carry a min of 1.5 Million in Coverage in case we damage a home.

Now 10 years ago you could get much less. most of the houses I work on are worth no more than maybe .5 Million. Why is it now law that I must carry 1.5 Million when I do not work on homes of that Value? Why Can't I carry .5 in coverage and if I do choose to work on a more valuable home, But a rider like you used to be able to do?

It's just one example in millions where government regulations are to one size fit all, and stick it to us all.

I've owned our business for 17 years. I believe the insurance you're referring to is business liability insurance, which covers more than the home. If one of your workers falls off a roof, the liability could easily exceed $1M. Or if drop a hammer on the residents head and put them in a coma etc...
Now if it is property only, then it comes down to the state giving you the license and then just hoping you'll never work in Grosse Point.

 

[JQPublic]

Generally speaking as government grows, freedom shrinks. The problem is that absent government there is no freedom, only fear.

 

[Intense]

So, Here are the Basics. I live in Michigan. For the last 25 Years I have worked in the Residential New Construction and Home Improvement Repair Industry in one way or another.

About 15 Years ago I actually ran my own company doing roofing and siding and did pretty well.

Well for Personal Reasons I have for most of the last 10 Years been working for other people rather than myself. However now with the economy the way it is. I have been trying to start up my own Roofing Company again. Believe it or not, while new construction is slow, the home Improvement Industry is doing well. People unable to move are instead putting money into their existing homes.

Well anyways, As a roofer you are required by law to carry certain amounts of Insurance. Both to cover you and any workers when working on someones home, and here where I live I find out that unlike 10 years ago. I now have no choice and have to carry a min of 1.5 Million in Coverage in case we damage a home.

Now 10 years ago you could get much less. most of the houses I work on are worth no more than maybe .5 Million. Why is it now law that I must carry 1.5 Million when I do not work on homes of that Value? Why Can't I carry .5 in coverage and if I do choose to work on a more valuable home, But a rider like you used to be able to do?

It's just one example in millions where government regulations are to one size fit all, and stick it to us all.

The amount is not that unreasonable. I'm in a similar situation. When you factor in liability and civil action, even injury liability, you are better off with the 1.5 coverage anyway. Until there are changes in the courts and limits set on settlements, should something bad happen, it's all up in the air anyway.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Being forced to get insurance by some *liberal muckity muck* sucks ass!
2. You do this to get that, *SCREW YOU!!!!!!*
3. If you meet our required bullshit, then you can get the work you need, to pay the ******* taxes you owe, to pay for Jose and his three-eight children living off of Medicare, SSI, Welfare, Food Stamps, and FREE MONEY..
4. Yeah, screw that!
5. Let me work, if I know what I'm doing get out of my way you MOFO *liberal muckity mucks*!!!!



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm kinda surprised by the folks who are on the shut-up and raise your price wagon here.

Actually, if it's general liability, (property and injury) then we ALL are in same boat. That problem is uncapped damage awards and high lawyer fees. Same problem that drives up medical costs.

What you MIGHT do Charles --- is to ping the Institute for Justice and find out the ORIGIN of that requirement in your state and whether anyone is challenging it. I remember one case not too long ago where a college kid had a successful biz installing mesh on roof/eave vents to keep out vermin. The city listed about $200K in licenses and insurance that he was required to acquire. Kinda like stopping kids from having a lemonade stand.. Realize that it's NOT a free country anymore. That "little bizness" is on the endangered species list and govt is hunting down the survivors..

Sorry if this "offends" any of the "govt ain't the boogey-man" crowd.. But I CAN'T explain to my kids why they can't have a lemonade stand or a swing at the playground anymore..

 

[Intense]

Guy's, when you are in business, working on or responsible for other peoples property, Liability Insurance is a part of the equation. It is a realistic expectation. Deal with it.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

Guy's, when you are in business, working on or responsible for other peoples property, Liability Insurance is a part of the equation. It is a realistic expectation. Deal with it.

1. **** that!
2. I was a roofer for 24 yars here in Texas, and never had liability insurance, NEVER!!!!!
3. I roofed thousands of houses, and not one loss.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[ClosedCaption]

Conservative thinking: Those liberals hate business

Conservative thinking: I hate big business...and liberals