Gov't Regulations

[easyt65]

WSJ, Reuters, Fox, CNN, and others reporting... What's the matter Jake, think I am going to blame Obama so you're ready to go on the attack?! This isn't something 'partisan'. It's about 'power' and 'control', something that has corrupted and twisted our politicians on both sides to the point where it's out of control. I'm not attacking any 1 person...just stating an obvious. We are no longer the 'world leader' in manufacturing, economy, etc. The fact that we are not in the top 10 in economic / business freedom should be a surprise to no one.

 

[JakeStarkey]

WSJ, Reuters, Fox, CNN, and others reporting... What's the matter Jake, think I am going to blame Obama so you're ready to go on the attack?! This isn't something 'partisan'. It's about 'power' and 'control', something that has corrupted and twisted our politicians on both sides to the point where it's out of control. I'm not attacking any 1 person...just stating an obvious. We are no longer the 'world leader' in manufacturing, economy, etc. The fact that we are not in the top 10 in economic / business freedom should be a surprise to no one.

And? That you think it is a bad thing? We still have the world's strongest economy. The entire world depends on us. If China tanks, it hurts us but we survive just fine. If the US tank, China is in the basement for twenty years.

You are throwing out opinion, nothing more.

 

[emilynghiem]

Then don't cohabit.

Yeah just let the fucking government tell you what to do in your private life

Hey why don't we just have the government tell us what to eat, what to set our thermostats at, what we drive, where we live, when we shit etc

That would be utopia for a retard like you wouldn't it?

Dear Skull Pilot
Remember America is diverse and is a learning ground for democracy and self-govt.
Not everyone is in the same place, and some people are socially/politically like "6th Graders."
Some people need to be under the "same rules for everyone" or they get out of line, like too many kids in one classroom. Some people need structure and uniformly enforced standards.

Until we organize the ratio of students to teachers to be something manageable,
we are going to have some collective management issues, where people who
aren't ready to take on responsibility for running their own classes/schools
need to 'follow the leader' and be under the guard of someone who can run a whole school.

That's just how people are socially. We need independence in some areas, but some people need fixed structure in order to feel secure.

Of course it gets idiotic, because people are learning, at different stages not all in sync.

Of course we DON'T need to impose the rules for third grade level
onto the post-doctoral grads who are ready to mentor in building their own school communities.

We are just not organized yet. That's what's wrong; it is just as dangerous to
take the rules that apply to college level politics, and expect newbies to be able to behave themselves under that. We don't need two-year-olds getting into the gun cabinet or the liquor.
But that doesn't mean we have to "ban" alcohol and guns from the entire household or neighborhood.

We don't need to yell and get mad at each other for needing different level approaches.
We need to work Smarter -- and organize by group level, and help each other succeed wherever we are on the scale from dependent to independent; and not criticize the fact we aren't all in the same place.

We don't need a one-room schoolhouse with everyone thrown in together.

Our country population is too big and diverse for that, we need to organize by class and field of interest,and do this right. Not step all over each other trying to compete to be in charge. We need to delegate, and the people we don't understand or agree with, let someone else be in charge of that group. Why not work with all the groups to serve and represent those interests?

That's what I see going on.

Our political arena is like a huge playground with mixed grades, where nobody is policing the bullies. We don't need one person to be "king of the playground" but need to share, and recognize not all people need the same amount of structure and supervision. Why is that so hard to understand, when we do this all the time, organizing students from K-12 and then in college, organizing people by field of specialty, including grad students, internships, residents in training, post-doctoral studies, etc.

I would organize people in something like 5 stages so all people at all stages of social/political development can access support they need with maximum independence, security and freedom without endangering or imposing on others:

0 - level 0 is if you are medically, mentally, criminally, physically or otherwise so disabled and dysfunctional you cannot operate or live on your own but need constant supervision or there is danger to yourself or others. This level requires serious professional medical help or detention by govt for public health safety and security. If you are so legally or mentally incompetent that you cannot help yourself, you are not even on the scale with others held responsible for their actions; as it would not be fair to judge you if you have no ability to change how you respond to situations without serious additional help on a constant basis, such as professionally trained experts.

1 - level 1 is if you are out of critical danger physically and mentally (do not require professional help or govt security), but lack financial, social, educational support where you end up homeless, in jail, in crisis, or otherwise unable to support yourself or function so you pose a burden to society and charity -- but not necessarily to govt -- this is the first step where if there was organized social assistance, NOBODY would need to become dependent on govt or taxpayers. Only people at level 0 would become govt responsibility, but charities/individuals can take on 1-5.

2 - level 2 is if you are responding to assistance and planned steps to independence, like enrolled in school or working a job or internship, but you are still dependent on others or institutions for help but not necessarily govt. You are still receiving more help than you give out, such as scholarships or help with school/housing expenses. If govt is used to help people at this level, the recipients should be able to pay back the help so it doesn't ride on taxpayers for handouts or bailouts.

3 - level 3 is if you are holding a job and maintaining stable living on your own; you do not depend on others without paying back, but you are not in a position to help more people, but mainly focused on keeping your life and activities within your budget. You are financially stable, about the middle of the scale or maybe above average because you do help others when you can afford it individually (but not as an organized group). How much you give and take, depend on others or others depend on you, comes out about even.

4 - level 4 is if you are maintaining your own, while focused on helping others more than your share or what you receive in return, or in the process of receiving training to do so -- such as learning to run a school, business or nonprofit. If you receive help from or depend on govt or charity, it is for helping serve others, not for yourself.

5 - level 5 is if you can or have set up and managed a business, school, nonprofit and you are mentoring or able to teach others to replicate this. You do not depend on govt except for things like national security, roads and public facilities, law enforcement and courts for issues of civil or criminal violations that become a public issue.
If anything you are contributing more to serve the public or govt with your own knowledge and resources.

If we can even assess where people are in life, we don't have to judge if people are at beginning levels of independence or way off the scale helping others more than they need help from govt.

Why can't we organize in teams and groups, and not try to make "one rule fits all' when we aren't in the same place? If people at level 5 are getting tax breaks for investing in schools, hospitals, charities, etc., the way of policing for abuses or corruptions is NOT the same as people who are still dependent on others at level 2-3 or especially level 1.

What is frustrating to see is treating people at level 5 as level 1 -- assuming they can't control or help themselves, so it means govt has to regulate and restrict people who can't be trusted not to abuse their freedom.

It seems the political agenda is to make rich people fear that most poor people are criminally inclined as level 1 or at level 2 where they are a burden to society, and this is getting pushed onto govt and public responsibility to pay for, instead of charities counseling and mentoring such people voluntarily. While the poor are told it's the rich who need to be taxed and regulated so they don't abuse their power and wealth to oppress the poor.

Why not just assess where people are and help them stabilize and succeed at that level before moving upward.

Why this need to blame, demonize and criminalize/penalize people? How is that helping anyone to improve?