Regulation

[Synthaholic]

The two chief methods by which wealth is concentrated is through the tax code and through regulation..

In other words GOVERNMENT and GOVERNMENT.

You sound like a hick.

All societies require a government.

 

[Synthaholic]

I can't tell you how many times I heard the apologists for the Wall Street crooks ask, "What laws did they break?" As if that made what they did right!

Just as Trump apologists do when confronted with his past history of stiffing contractors.

 

[Tehon]

Some people want to punish "the rich" just for being rich. They see all rich people as evil doers who must be robbed and their wealth redistributed out of some bizarre sense of "fairness", and they believe the government should decide what is fair.

This is insane. Leaving it to the government to decide what is fair is just plain insane. Do liberals really want Trump and the Republicans deciding what is fair?

You see the giant flaw in that plan now?

So let's apply some common sense..

How does wealth become concentrated in the hands of a few?

One way wealth is accumulated is by inventing a better mousetrap. This kind of entrepreneurship should be encouraged, and the United States excels at promoting this kind of economic growth.

Punishing this behavior is self-defeating, but that is precisely what societies based on marxism do.


There are other means, though, by which wealth is unnaturally concentrated. It is these means which I occasionally address on this forum.

Wealth is unnaturally concentrated through legislation. This legislation is enacted by politicians who are owned by special interests. These politicians are paid a lot of money to enact legislation which favors their paymasters.

If you want true campaign finance reform, if you want truly honest government, you have to take the levers of power away from politicians and return it to the people.

Yes, this means smaller government.

It astonishes me to no end to see people demanding more and more government control over our lives, and then to see the same people complain when that control is captured by special interests.

Concentrating power at the federal level makes the capture of that power easier! I do not know why liberals continue to fail to see this obvious fact.


The two chief methods by which wealth is concentrated is through the tax code and through regulation. You are all probably all tired of hearing me go on and on about tax expenditures and how they are raping all of us in the ass.

If you don't get that by now, you never will.

So now I will talk about regulation. Good and bad regulation, and the stupid things people on both sides of the argument say.

More in the next post...

Well....yeah but we have clowns running both parties that hate the people.

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

The people of this country are idiots. We already have the power to alter the government and yet we have been getting clobbered for decades. And it isn't going to change.

 

[westwall]

Did you skip Dodd Frank?

See post 6.

I thought this was going to be enlightening, but no. This is what I get for trying to learn anything about economic or financial anything. Put on your dunce cap and go sit in the back, Old Lady, we haven't got time for you.

Well, specifically, what regulations are putting power into the hands of the giant corporations and (I'm guessing) banks? Will Trump's idea of getting rid of two regulations for every one that is proposed do that trick, or will that just willy nilly get rid of some that no one cares about anyway?

Trump's idea of getting rid of two regulations for every one is amateurish and stupid. It's a simpleton's solution to a problem he clearly has no clue about.

It reminds me of when I was in the military and a directive came down to cut all training courses at our command by ten percent.

The order was not to determine which courses had fat in them or could be trimmed. The order was to arbitrarily trim EVERY course by ten percent.

Training is critical to readiness. To assume EVERY course could be cut by ten percent was one of the most boneheaded assumptions I ever saw.

Trump ASSUMES every agency can cut two regulations for every new one they create. It's idiotic thinking.

More than idiotic, it is sheer laziness. It's the sign of a person who does not want to do the hard work of actually taking the time to identify unnecessary regulations. It shows a total lack of talent for the job.

As for the banks and Dodd-Frank, the financial industry screwed the proverbial pooch. They asked to have derivatives completely unregulated, and they asked the federal government to pre-empt state laws regulating casinos and bucket shops. Why would a bank need to be exempt from laws against bucket shops and laws regulating casinos? That should have been a HUGE signal something evil was afoot.

Not one conservative mouthpiece, not Fox News or Rush or Hannity or any other right wing propagandist, opened their mouth in outrage at the federal pre-emption of state laws.

And they still don't, even though it happens nearly every day in bills before Congress.

Republicans enact federal pre-emptions of state laws on a regular basis. They usurp the tenth amendment for breakfast. They are hypocrites of the first water.

When the deregulation of the financial industry ended up bringing the world to financial armageddon, the backlash was Dodd-Frank.

Instead of letting companies with bad business models go under, and allowing more efficient and better run businesses to supplant them, the federal government rescues the toxic companies under the guise of "too big to fail". As a result, each subsequent failure is larger than the last.

Now those same corrupt and sclerotic companies are too big to save when the next downturn comes. We are all fucked.

His idea has been tried elsewhere and it has worked pretty well. Just sayin... It ain't his idea.

Where has it worked, ever?

"The Canadian federal government adopted the measure on a less extensive basis, with swathes of regulatory activity not subject to the limit. The “Red Tape Reduction Act” also did not count “regulatory requirements.” That compromise secured its passage of the by a margin of 245-1 but made the law less robust.

Still, adoption of the One-for-One rule “has led to considerable savings in financial cost and time allocation for individuals and businesses,” according to Sean Speer at the R Street Institute. By the government’s estimate, between 2012 and June 2014, the One-for-One Rule “reduced the net annual administrative burden on business by over $22 million, resulting in an estimated annual savings of 290,000 hours in time spent dealing with regulatory red tape, and has achieved a net reduction of 19 regulations taken off the books." And more could be done. The Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses believes the current $37 billion businesses must pay to comply with regulations each year could be cut by another $11 billion with no harm to safety, health, or the environment."

The Canadian and UK roots of Trump’s regulation executive order: When good ideas cross borders | Acton Institute

 

[westwall]

Some people want to punish "the rich" just for being rich. They see all rich people as evil doers who must be robbed and their wealth redistributed out of some bizarre sense of "fairness", and they believe the government should decide what is fair.

This is insane. Leaving it to the government to decide what is fair is just plain insane. Do liberals really want Trump and the Republicans deciding what is fair?

You see the giant flaw in that plan now?

So let's apply some common sense..

How does wealth become concentrated in the hands of a few?

One way wealth is accumulated is by inventing a better mousetrap. This kind of entrepreneurship should be encouraged, and the United States excels at promoting this kind of economic growth.

Punishing this behavior is self-defeating, but that is precisely what societies based on marxism do.


There are other means, though, by which wealth is unnaturally concentrated. It is these means which I occasionally address on this forum.

Wealth is unnaturally concentrated through legislation. This legislation is enacted by politicians who are owned by special interests. These politicians are paid a lot of money to enact legislation which favors their paymasters.

If you want true campaign finance reform, if you want truly honest government, you have to take the levers of power away from politicians and return it to the people.

Yes, this means smaller government.

It astonishes me to no end to see people demanding more and more government control over our lives, and then to see the same people complain when that control is captured by special interests.

Concentrating power at the federal level makes the capture of that power easier! I do not know why liberals continue to fail to see this obvious fact.


The two chief methods by which wealth is concentrated is through the tax code and through regulation. You are all probably all tired of hearing me go on and on about tax expenditures and how they are raping all of us in the ass.

If you don't get that by now, you never will.

So now I will talk about regulation. Good and bad regulation, and the stupid things people on both sides of the argument say.

More in the next post...

Well....yeah but we have clowns running both parties that hate the people.

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

The people of this country are idiots. We already have the power to alter the government and yet we have been getting clobbered for decades. And it isn't going to change.

Yes, they are. The political class has relied on the lobster in the slowly heating cooking pot to get their system set up. The problem for the new politicians is the water is beginning to boil, but we still have the means to get ourselves out of the pot. If the 2nd Amendment gets repealed, that ability go's away however.

 

[Tehon]

Well....yeah but we have clowns running both parties that hate the people.

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

The people of this country are idiots. We already have the power to alter the government and yet we have been getting clobbered for decades. And it isn't going to change.

Yes, they are. The political class has relied on the lobster in the slowly heating cooking pot to get their system set up. The problem for the new politicians is the water is beginning to boil, but we still have the means to get ourselves out of the pot. If the 2nd Amendment gets repealed, that ability go's away however.

The oven is called neo-liberalism, it's been a staple of conservative politics since Reagan. Enjoy the meal you cooked.

 

[westwall]

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

The people of this country are idiots. We already have the power to alter the government and yet we have been getting clobbered for decades. And it isn't going to change.

Yes, they are. The political class has relied on the lobster in the slowly heating cooking pot to get their system set up. The problem for the new politicians is the water is beginning to boil, but we still have the means to get ourselves out of the pot. If the 2nd Amendment gets repealed, that ability go's away however.

The oven is called neo-liberalism, it's been a staple of conservative politics since Reagan. Enjoy the meal you cooked.

No, it's called progressivism and it has been cooking for at least 90 years.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Some people want to punish "the rich" just for being rich. They see all rich people as evil doers who must be robbed and their wealth redistributed out of some bizarre sense of "fairness", and they believe the government should decide what is fair.

This is insane. Leaving it to the government to decide what is fair is just plain insane. Do liberals really want Trump and the Republicans deciding what is fair?

You see the giant flaw in that plan now?

So let's apply some common sense..

How does wealth become concentrated in the hands of a few?

One way wealth is accumulated is by inventing a better mousetrap. This kind of entrepreneurship should be encouraged, and the United States excels at promoting this kind of economic growth.

Punishing this behavior is self-defeating, but that is precisely what societies based on marxism do.


There are other means, though, by which wealth is unnaturally concentrated. It is these means which I occasionally address on this forum.

Wealth is unnaturally concentrated through legislation. This legislation is enacted by politicians who are owned by special interests. These politicians are paid a lot of money to enact legislation which favors their paymasters.

If you want true campaign finance reform, if you want truly honest government, you have to take the levers of power away from politicians and return it to the people.

Yes, this means smaller government.

It astonishes me to no end to see people demanding more and more government co Introl over our lives, and then to see the same people complain when that control is captured by special interests.

Concentrating power at the federal level makes the capture of that power easier! I do not know why liberals continue to fail to see this obvious fact.


The two chief methods by which wealth is concentrated is through the tax code and through regulation. You are all probably all tired of hearing me go on and on about tax expenditures and how they are raping all of us in the ass.

If you don't get that by now, you never will.

So now I will talk about regulation. Good and bad regulation, and the stupid things people on both sides of the argument say.

More in the next post...

Well....yeah but we have clowns running both parties that hate the people.

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

True that both parties suck at this governing thing and mostly because they are so easily bought!

 

[westwall]

Some people want to punish "the rich" just for being rich. They see all rich people as evil doers who must be robbed and their wealth redistributed out of some bizarre sense of "fairness", and they believe the government should decide what is fair.

This is insane. Leaving it to the government to decide what is fair is just plain insane. Do liberals really want Trump and the Republicans deciding what is fair?

You see the giant flaw in that plan now?

So let's apply some common sense..

How does wealth become concentrated in the hands of a few?

One way wealth is accumulated is by inventing a better mousetrap. This kind of entrepreneurship should be encouraged, and the United States excels at promoting this kind of economic growth.

Punishing this behavior is self-defeating, but that is precisely what societies based on marxism do.


There are other means, though, by which wealth is unnaturally concentrated. It is these means which I occasionally address on this forum.

Wealth is unnaturally concentrated through legislation. This legislation is enacted by politicians who are owned by special interests. These politicians are paid a lot of money to enact legislation which favors their paymasters.

If you want true campaign finance reform, if you want truly honest government, you have to take the levers of power away from politicians and return it to the people.

Yes, this means smaller government.

It astonishes me to no end to see people demanding more and more government co Introl over our lives, and then to see the same people complain when that control is captured by special interests.

Concentrating power at the federal level makes the capture of that power easier! I do not know why liberals continue to fail to see this obvious fact.


The two chief methods by which wealth is concentrated is through the tax code and through regulation. You are all probably all tired of hearing me go on and on about tax expenditures and how they are raping all of us in the ass.

If you don't get that by now, you never will.

So now I will talk about regulation. Good and bad regulation, and the stupid things people on both sides of the argument say.

More in the next post...

Well....yeah but we have clowns running both parties that hate the people.

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

True that both parties suck at this governing thing and mostly because they are so easily bought!

The way I look at it the repubs are taking us towards a dictatorship at 75 mph, while the democrats are taking us there at 100 mph. In the end both Party's (the political class if you will) desire an authoritarian dictatorship.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Take away the power? What do you mean by that?

I'll give you an example.

If you give a politician the power to enact tax breaks, then you provide an incentive for powerful interests to bribe him to give them tax breaks.

Tax breaks have to be compensated for by raising tax rates on everyone else.

Take away the power to enact tax breaks, you take away the incentive to bribe. This is the ONLY way to realize effective campaign finance reform.

Take away the power to enact tax breaks for special interests, you ensure a level playing field for every taxpayer, and lower tax rates for everyone.

How does Congress enact a budget each year and when necessary change the tax structure if they can't change it?

Congress should only be setting the tax margins and their rates. They should not be handing out gifts in the form of exemptions, credits, and deductions.

This is the most corrupt practice in our history. What's more, it is government social engineering, and it is failing horribly. At huge expense to our children and our children's children.

Who SHOULD be setting exemptions, credits and deductions? Or are you saying there shouldn't be any? Are you proposing a flat tax?

I agree with you that cuts in regs and the budget need to be done by the folks who really know the programs.

I also appreciate you taking the time to explain this stuff.

I am saying we should not have any exemptions, credits, or deductions.

A flat tax has nothing to do with exemptions, credits, or deductions. Since a flat tax is an income tax, it can still be thoroughly corrupted by exemptions, credits, and deductions, too.

I actually favor the Fair Tax. However, no matter what tax scheme you have, it can be corrupted by exemptions, etc. That is why we MUST address the disease first.

And that particular disease when it comes to taxes is exemptions, credits, and deductions.

Kill tax exemptions, deductions, and credits, and we can have much lower tax rates. And the playing field would be level. People earning identical incomes would pay identical taxes.

Our current system is insane. Entities making the same incomes are paying radically different taxes. Both corporate and individual.

That's government social engineering and it is an outrage.[/QUOTE

Well....yeah but we have clowns running both parties that hate the people.

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

True that both parties suck at this governing thing and mostly because they are so easily bought!

The way I look at it the repubs are taking us towards a dictatorship at 75 mph, while the democrats are taking us there at 100 mph. In the end both Party's (the political class if you will) desire an authoritarian dictatorship.

No argument, they are essentially the same party in my mind. Disguising their bullshit in different ways.

 

[g5000]

See post 6.

I thought this was going to be enlightening, but no. This is what I get for trying to learn anything about economic or financial anything. Put on your dunce cap and go sit in the back, Old Lady, we haven't got time for you.

Well, specifically, what regulations are putting power into the hands of the giant corporations and (I'm guessing) banks? Will Trump's idea of getting rid of two regulations for every one that is proposed do that trick, or will that just willy nilly get rid of some that no one cares about anyway?

Trump's idea of getting rid of two regulations for every one is amateurish and stupid. It's a simpleton's solution to a problem he clearly has no clue about.

It reminds me of when I was in the military and a directive came down to cut all training courses at our command by ten percent.

The order was not to determine which courses had fat in them or could be trimmed. The order was to arbitrarily trim EVERY course by ten percent.

Training is critical to readiness. To assume EVERY course could be cut by ten percent was one of the most boneheaded assumptions I ever saw.

Trump ASSUMES every agency can cut two regulations for every new one they create. It's idiotic thinking.

More than idiotic, it is sheer laziness. It's the sign of a person who does not want to do the hard work of actually taking the time to identify unnecessary regulations. It shows a total lack of talent for the job.

As for the banks and Dodd-Frank, the financial industry screwed the proverbial pooch. They asked to have derivatives completely unregulated, and they asked the federal government to pre-empt state laws regulating casinos and bucket shops. Why would a bank need to be exempt from laws against bucket shops and laws regulating casinos? That should have been a HUGE signal something evil was afoot.

Not one conservative mouthpiece, not Fox News or Rush or Hannity or any other right wing propagandist, opened their mouth in outrage at the federal pre-emption of state laws.

And they still don't, even though it happens nearly every day in bills before Congress.

Republicans enact federal pre-emptions of state laws on a regular basis. They usurp the tenth amendment for breakfast. They are hypocrites of the first water.

When the deregulation of the financial industry ended up bringing the world to financial armageddon, the backlash was Dodd-Frank.

Instead of letting companies with bad business models go under, and allowing more efficient and better run businesses to supplant them, the federal government rescues the toxic companies under the guise of "too big to fail". As a result, each subsequent failure is larger than the last.

Now those same corrupt and sclerotic companies are too big to save when the next downturn comes. We are all fucked.

His idea has been tried elsewhere and it has worked pretty well. Just sayin... It ain't his idea.

Where has it worked, ever?

"The Canadian federal government adopted the measure on a less extensive basis, with swathes of regulatory activity not subject to the limit. The “Red Tape Reduction Act” also did not count “regulatory requirements.” That compromise secured its passage of the by a margin of 245-1 but made the law less robust.

Still, adoption of the One-for-One rule “has led to considerable savings in financial cost and time allocation for individuals and businesses,” according to Sean Speer at the R Street Institute. By the government’s estimate, between 2012 and June 2014, the One-for-One Rule “reduced the net annual administrative burden on business by over $22 million, resulting in an estimated annual savings of 290,000 hours in time spent dealing with regulatory red tape, and has achieved a net reduction of 19 regulations taken off the books." And more could be done. The Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses believes the current $37 billion businesses must pay to comply with regulations each year could be cut by another $11 billion with no harm to safety, health, or the environment."

The Canadian and UK roots of Trump’s regulation executive order: When good ideas cross borders | Acton Institute

19 regulations? That's it!?!

 

[FA_Q2]

If you give a politician power over your life, you are providing an incentive for a special interest to purchase that power.

Take away the ability for a politician to control your life, you take away the incentive for a special interest to donate campaign cash to him to do what that special interest wishes.

Bingo. This is the key - there is no way to stop large entities purchasing political power no matter how many campaign finance reforms or other laws are put into place as long as the profits in those purchases are so damn massive.

The only way to wrest that control away is to make purchasing political power unprofitable. You are spot on with the tax code - that monstrosity is where the bulk of the problem lies.

I disagree with a 'fair tax' scheme as the best way to go preferring a flat tax myself BUT I would go for virtually ANY tax structure that eliminated the special interest carve outs. The details are minor compared to bringing the tax code back to its purpose, funding the government, rather than its current use of social and economic control.

Well....yeah but we have clowns running both parties that hate the people.

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

Take away the power? What do you mean by that?

I'll give you an example.

If you give a politician the power to enact tax breaks, then you provide an incentive for powerful interests to bribe him to give them tax breaks.

Tax breaks have to be compensated for by raising tax rates on everyone else.

Take away the power to enact tax breaks, you take away the incentive to bribe. This is the ONLY way to realize effective campaign finance reform.

Take away the power to enact tax breaks for special interests, you ensure a level playing field for every taxpayer, and lower tax rates for everyone.

How does Congress enact a budget each year and when necessary change the tax structure if they can't change it?

Congress should only be setting the tax margins and their rates. They should not be handing out gifts in the form of exemptions, credits, and deductions.

This is the most corrupt practice in our history. What's more, it is government social engineering, and it is failing horribly. At huge expense to our children and our children's children.

I find that I disagree with you often on the small details G but on the big stuff, the stuff that matters, you are generally spot on. Good thread.

 

[westwall]

I thought this was going to be enlightening, but no. This is what I get for trying to learn anything about economic or financial anything. Put on your dunce cap and go sit in the back, Old Lady, we haven't got time for you.

Well, specifically, what regulations are putting power into the hands of the giant corporations and (I'm guessing) banks? Will Trump's idea of getting rid of two regulations for every one that is proposed do that trick, or will that just willy nilly get rid of some that no one cares about anyway?

Trump's idea of getting rid of two regulations for every one is amateurish and stupid. It's a simpleton's solution to a problem he clearly has no clue about.

It reminds me of when I was in the military and a directive came down to cut all training courses at our command by ten percent.

The order was not to determine which courses had fat in them or could be trimmed. The order was to arbitrarily trim EVERY course by ten percent.

Training is critical to readiness. To assume EVERY course could be cut by ten percent was one of the most boneheaded assumptions I ever saw.

Trump ASSUMES every agency can cut two regulations for every new one they create. It's idiotic thinking.

More than idiotic, it is sheer laziness. It's the sign of a person who does not want to do the hard work of actually taking the time to identify unnecessary regulations. It shows a total lack of talent for the job.

As for the banks and Dodd-Frank, the financial industry screwed the proverbial pooch. They asked to have derivatives completely unregulated, and they asked the federal government to pre-empt state laws regulating casinos and bucket shops. Why would a bank need to be exempt from laws against bucket shops and laws regulating casinos? That should have been a HUGE signal something evil was afoot.

Not one conservative mouthpiece, not Fox News or Rush or Hannity or any other right wing propagandist, opened their mouth in outrage at the federal pre-emption of state laws.

And they still don't, even though it happens nearly every day in bills before Congress.

Republicans enact federal pre-emptions of state laws on a regular basis. They usurp the tenth amendment for breakfast. They are hypocrites of the first water.

When the deregulation of the financial industry ended up bringing the world to financial armageddon, the backlash was Dodd-Frank.

Instead of letting companies with bad business models go under, and allowing more efficient and better run businesses to supplant them, the federal government rescues the toxic companies under the guise of "too big to fail". As a result, each subsequent failure is larger than the last.

Now those same corrupt and sclerotic companies are too big to save when the next downturn comes. We are all fucked.

His idea has been tried elsewhere and it has worked pretty well. Just sayin... It ain't his idea.

Where has it worked, ever?

"The Canadian federal government adopted the measure on a less extensive basis, with swathes of regulatory activity not subject to the limit. The “Red Tape Reduction Act” also did not count “regulatory requirements.” That compromise secured its passage of the by a margin of 245-1 but made the law less robust.

Still, adoption of the One-for-One rule “has led to considerable savings in financial cost and time allocation for individuals and businesses,” according to Sean Speer at the R Street Institute. By the government’s estimate, between 2012 and June 2014, the One-for-One Rule “reduced the net annual administrative burden on business by over $22 million, resulting in an estimated annual savings of 290,000 hours in time spent dealing with regulatory red tape, and has achieved a net reduction of 19 regulations taken off the books." And more could be done. The Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses believes the current $37 billion businesses must pay to comply with regulations each year could be cut by another $11 billion with no harm to safety, health, or the environment."

The Canadian and UK roots of Trump’s regulation executive order: When good ideas cross borders | Acton Institute

19 regulations? That's it!?!

No, it is now far more than that. The UK has been doing it as well.

 

[Tehon]

Some people want to punish "the rich" just for being rich. They see all rich people as evil doers who must be robbed and their wealth redistributed out of some bizarre sense of "fairness", and they believe the government should decide what is fair.

This is insane. Leaving it to the government to decide what is fair is just plain insane. Do liberals really want Trump and the Republicans deciding what is fair?

You see the giant flaw in that plan now?

So let's apply some common sense..

How does wealth become concentrated in the hands of a few?

One way wealth is accumulated is by inventing a better mousetrap. This kind of entrepreneurship should be encouraged, and the United States excels at promoting this kind of economic growth.

Punishing this behavior is self-defeating, but that is precisely what societies based on marxism do.


There are other means, though, by which wealth is unnaturally concentrated. It is these means which I occasionally address on this forum.

Wealth is unnaturally concentrated through legislation. This legislation is enacted by politicians who are owned by special interests. These politicians are paid a lot of money to enact legislation which favors their paymasters.

If you want true campaign finance reform, if you want truly honest government, you have to take the levers of power away from politicians and return it to the people.

Yes, this means smaller government.

It astonishes me to no end to see people demanding more and more government control over our lives, and then to see the same people complain when that control is captured by special interests.

Concentrating power at the federal level makes the capture of that power easier! I do not know why liberals continue to fail to see this obvious fact.


The two chief methods by which wealth is concentrated is through the tax code and through regulation. You are all probably all tired of hearing me go on and on about tax expenditures and how they are raping all of us in the ass.

If you don't get that by now, you never will.

So now I will talk about regulation. Good and bad regulation, and the stupid things people on both sides of the argument say.

More in the next post...

Well....yeah but we have clowns running both parties that hate the people.

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

I am not saying take away ALL power. I am saying the federal government has far exceeded its intended limits and needs to be considerably reeled in so our economy may function more efficiently, and provide a level playing field for everyone.

So at what point will you propose a constitutional amendment designed to limit their power? Or have I just missed it?

 

[OldLady]

Take away the power? What do you mean by that?

I'll give you an example.

If you give a politician the power to enact tax breaks, then you provide an incentive for powerful interests to bribe him to give them tax breaks.

Tax breaks have to be compensated for by raising tax rates on everyone else.

Take away the power to enact tax breaks, you take away the incentive to bribe. This is the ONLY way to realize effective campaign finance reform.

Take away the power to enact tax breaks for special interests, you ensure a level playing field for every taxpayer, and lower tax rates for everyone.

How does Congress enact a budget each year and when necessary change the tax structure if they can't change it?

Congress should only be setting the tax margins and their rates. They should not be handing out gifts in the form of exemptions, credits, and deductions.

This is the most corrupt practice in our history. What's more, it is government social engineering, and it is failing horribly. At huge expense to our children and our children's children.

As long as we have really poor folks, we HAVE to invest in a healthy start for the kids or it will just perpetuate itself. That's not saying we don't take a long look at entitlements and generations of families dependent on welfare. I have a feeling it is more the difficulty moving out of poverty than the welfare benefits, to be honest, though.

How to deal with poverty is an entirely different topic.

And the government has completely screwed that up, too.

What's more, it is government social engineering, and it is failing horribly. At huge expense to our children and our children's children.
I thought that was a reference to entitlement programs.

 

[OldLady]

Well....yeah but we have clowns running both parties that hate the people.

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

The people of this country are idiots. We already have the power to alter the government and yet we have been getting clobbered for decades. And it isn't going to change.

Yes, they are. The political class has relied on the lobster in the slowly heating cooking pot to get their system set up. The problem for the new politicians is the water is beginning to boil, but we still have the means to get ourselves out of the pot. If the 2nd Amendment gets repealed, that ability go's away however.

You will not successfully revolt against the government with your AK47's and M16's. They have bigger toys. All you will accomplish is a lot of death.

 

[Synthaholic]

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

The people of this country are idiots. We already have the power to alter the government and yet we have been getting clobbered for decades. And it isn't going to change.

Yes, they are. The political class has relied on the lobster in the slowly heating cooking pot to get their system set up. The problem for the new politicians is the water is beginning to boil, but we still have the means to get ourselves out of the pot. If the 2nd Amendment gets repealed, that ability go's away however.

You will not successfully revolt against the government with your AK47's and M16's. They have bigger toys. All you will accomplish is a lot of death.

westwall, and his fellow conservatives have Red Dawn fantasies.

 

[Moonglow]

They can keep there money, but take back being a christian...

 

[Moonglow]

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

The people of this country are idiots. We already have the power to alter the government and yet we have been getting clobbered for decades. And it isn't going to change.

Yes, they are. The political class has relied on the lobster in the slowly heating cooking pot to get their system set up. The problem for the new politicians is the water is beginning to boil, but we still have the means to get ourselves out of the pot. If the 2nd Amendment gets repealed, that ability go's away however.

You will not successfully revolt against the government with your AK47's and M16's. They have bigger toys. All you will accomplish is a lot of death.

westwall, and his fellow conservatives have Red Dawn fantasies.

When you're eighty you will to..

 

[westwall]

They don't hate the people so much as they love power. And the way to retain that power is to accept money from special interests to help them get re-elected. And the way to get money from special interests is to do their bidding.

Take away the power, you take away the money incentive.

If a politician has nothing to sell, there is nothing to buy.

The politician sees the people as rubes who have no clue what is going on. Sadly, this assessment is true.

"He has an R after his name, so he can do no wrong!"

If you take away their power then who will have the power to write laws that are good and proper?

The PEOPLE of this country. The political class has been at war with we the PEOPLE for decades now. Why do you think that no matter how many times the Democrat party says we are here to help you but the only thing we ever see is their cronies being helped....with OUR tax money.

The people of this country are idiots. We already have the power to alter the government and yet we have been getting clobbered for decades. And it isn't going to change.

Yes, they are. The political class has relied on the lobster in the slowly heating cooking pot to get their system set up. The problem for the new politicians is the water is beginning to boil, but we still have the means to get ourselves out of the pot. If the 2nd Amendment gets repealed, that ability go's away however.

You will not successfully revolt against the government with your AK47's and M16's. They have bigger toys. All you will accomplish is a lot of death.

I am actively working AGAINST a revolution, oldlady. I know how terrible they are, and I don't wish to see that sort of misery visited upon this country.