Trump's "deregulating" everything is tantamount to.......

[Mac1958]

progressives seem to equate volume of regulation with it's level of effectiveness. People who actually work in the regulated industries would beg to differ.

Well, I do work in one of them, and I do agree that Democrats confuse volume of regulation with effectiveness.

But unfortunately, and as usual, the Republicans do precisely the same thing.
.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Anything That damages the federal government is a good thing for the country. Dip shit

This might be the most idiotic post I have ever read on this forum, and that is a high bar to get over.

It is a crying shame that people as stupid as you get to vote. There really should be an IQ test for voting, anyone with an IQ lower than a head of cabbage is barred from voting. Then I would not have to worry about people like you voting.

There really should be an IQ test for voting,

Dems would be down to 20 Senate seats.

 

[Mac1958]

How anyone can look at what happened in 2008/9 and still push for broad deregulation is a testament to the power of partisan ideology.

Exactly! Like that regulation that forced Fannie and Freddie to make 55% of their mortgage purchases, subprime mortgages. Good stuff!!!

That would be one example. And I could cite several key instances of under-regulation as well.

As much as both ends want to point the finger at the other, this was a group effort.
.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Anything That damages the federal government is a good thing for the country. Dip shit

This might be the most idiotic post I have ever read on this forum, and that is a high bar to get over.

It is a crying shame that people as stupid as you get to vote. There really should be an IQ test for voting, anyone with an IQ lower than a head of cabbage is barred from voting. Then I would not have to worry about people like you voting.

There really should be an IQ test for voting,

Dems would be down to 20 Senate seats.

And you would never be able to vote again...it is a win/win for me!

 

[JoeMoma]

Anything That damages the federal government is a good thing for the country. Dip shit

This might be the most idiotic post I have ever read on this forum, and that is a high bar to get over.

It is a crying shame that people as stupid as you get to vote. There really should be an IQ test for voting, anyone with an IQ lower than a head of cabbage is barred from voting. Then I would not have to worry about people like you voting.

There really should be an IQ test for voting,

Dems would be down to 20 Senate seats.

And you would never be able to vote again...it is a win/win for me!

More than likely those with too high of an IQ would not be allowed to vote.

 

[BULLDOG]

ANARCHY......a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority..

Somehow, Trump cultist "think" that the removal of any safeguards for consumers and clients from "kind-hearted and altruistic" companies will be better for the common citizen.
After all, companies' main objective is to do what is morally and ethically best for consumers, and NOT to make huge profits with the least amount of expenditure.....CORRECT, right wingers???

Here's an example.......Health care insurers....as most insurers have managed to BRIBE congress to make them EXEMPT from anti-trust regulations, so that they could be free to COLLUDE on price fixing and completely eliminate competition........basically the ANTITHESIS of capitalistic tenets.

Price fixing, a free hand in polluting, the emergence of scams to defraud, rising costs, abolition of competition, etc. ARE ALL "legally" ushered in through deregulation.

"Thank you" fat, stupid and inept orange clown.....

(It'll take quite a while to undo this idiot's and his cult's screw-ups.)

Let's take your health insurers example.
Assume you are the president of a start up health insurance company.
Are you aware that you need if you wanted to start this health insurance company in Florida more than $2.5 million...known as reserves.
http://www.naic.org/documents/industry_ucaa_chart_min_capital_surplus.pdf

Now say you have $3 million available for reserves and start up costs.
Now say you sell 1,000 people all age 35... yes I know that's an impossibility but the complexity of actuarial aspects is great. (I bet you have NO IDEA what an actuary does do you?)
Remember this is health insurance. You are telling people to pay you in Florida $3,881 per year.
Average Cost Of Health Insurance (2017)
So that's $3,881,700 in premiums ... WOW... that's great! happy days... Rich evil capitalist now is what you are!
But wait.... We forgot about paying claims... hmmm....
called Medical loss ratio the average health insurance company...
If an insurer uses 80 cents out of every premium dollar to pay its customers' medical claims and activities that improve the quality of care, the company has a medical loss ratio of 80%. A medical loss ratio of 80% indicates that the insurer is using the remaining 20 cents of each premium dollar to pay overhead expenses, such as marketing, profits, salaries, administrative costs, and agent commissions. The Affordable Care Act sets minimum medical loss ratios for different markets, as do some state laws.
Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) - HealthCare.gov Glossary
So out of the $3,881,700 in premiums...oh... no...that's $3,105,360...leaving what $776,340 for overhead, marketing, etc. and wait a minute FLORIDA requires RESERVES for future
claims... so that comes out of this $776,340 also!
And of course those idiots in Obamacare hating "profits" now forced insurance companies to pay out 85% or rebate the difference!

So Mr. President of the health insurance company after all these expenses of 85% or that leaves $582,255 to pay for salaries, marketing, etc. PLUS wait remember reserves.
This leaves based on national averages of net profits BEFORE TAXES... of less then 6% or $34,935! And this is before of about 53.5% (Aetna's taxes) TAXES!

So Mr. President of the Health insurance company... What is the profit on that $2.5 million required to start the insurance company in Florida ? 0.007%!
Wow what a return on investment!!!

You're feeling sorry for insurance companies now? That's nuts.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Anything That damages the federal government is a good thing for the country. Dip shit

This might be the most idiotic post I have ever read on this forum, and that is a high bar to get over.

It is a crying shame that people as stupid as you get to vote. There really should be an IQ test for voting, anyone with an IQ lower than a head of cabbage is barred from voting. Then I would not have to worry about people like you voting.

There really should be an IQ test for voting,

Dems would be down to 20 Senate seats.

And you would never be able to vote again...it is a win/win for me!

More than likely those with too high of an IQ would not be allowed to vote.

Hey, at least I still get to vote either way! LOL

 

[jknowgood]

Only got seven more years to deal with it.

Go sacrifice a right wing virgin to help your cause......LOL

Lol, that sacrifice would be mine for the taken. There are no virgins my age.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Anything That damages the federal government is a good thing for the country. Dip shit

This might be the most idiotic post I have ever read on this forum, and that is a high bar to get over.

It is a crying shame that people as stupid as you get to vote. There really should be an IQ test for voting, anyone with an IQ lower than a head of cabbage is barred from voting. Then I would not have to worry about people like you voting.

There really should be an IQ test for voting,

Dems would be down to 20 Senate seats.

And you would never be able to vote again...it is a win/win for me!

I'd give up my vote to get the Dems down to 20 seats.
I live in Chicago, so my vote is no great loss.

 

[Rustic]

Anything That damages the federal government is a good thing for the country. Dip shit

This might be the most idiotic post I have ever read on this forum, and that is a high bar to get over.

It is a crying shame that people as stupid as you get to vote. There really should be an IQ test for voting, anyone with an IQ lower than a head of cabbage is barred from voting. Then I would not have to worry about people like you voting.

The federal government and the country or not one in the same. dumbass

 

[DGS49]

Think about the expression, "Nanny State."

Lots of people within and outside the Government believe that the Government should serve as the protector of the populace, and while it may be a noble goal it is not a wise or a Constitutional goal. Regulations that go beyond the reach of the legislation of Congress and/or the limits of the Constitution should be rolled back or abolished.

Simple as that.

Net Neutrality? Gimmeafukkinbreak. We are talking about activity in the normal stream of commerce, where the seller has every right to impose limitations or not, to service whomever it chooses to serve, and to charge whatever the market will bear.

A good illustration of Government gone mad. Now rolled back.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Trump's "deregulating" everything is tantamount to....

....exactly what it appears to be: undoing everything his predecessors and opposers feel benefits the country. It is quite literally his imposing himself, his personal predilections, and authority on the nation. If his deregulation be endorsed by subsequent POTUSes, might it lead to consternation among the citizenry and, as you say, anarchy? I suppose it could. One thing I feel certain about is that some of his deregulatory fiats are making great little other than the fortunes of corporations that'd usurp and poison the rights and property that to us all belong.

 

[healthmyths]

ANARCHY......a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority..

Somehow, Trump cultist "think" that the removal of any safeguards for consumers and clients from "kind-hearted and altruistic" companies will be better for the common citizen.
After all, companies' main objective is to do what is morally and ethically best for consumers, and NOT to make huge profits with the least amount of expenditure.....CORRECT, right wingers???

Here's an example.......Health care insurers....as most insurers have managed to BRIBE congress to make them EXEMPT from anti-trust regulations, so that they could be free to COLLUDE on price fixing and completely eliminate competition........basically the ANTITHESIS of capitalistic tenets.

Price fixing, a free hand in polluting, the emergence of scams to defraud, rising costs, abolition of competition, etc. ARE ALL "legally" ushered in through deregulation.

"Thank you" fat, stupid and inept orange clown.....

(It'll take quite a while to undo this idiot's and his cult's screw-ups.)

Let's take your health insurers example.
Assume you are the president of a start up health insurance company.
Are you aware that you need if you wanted to start this health insurance company in Florida more than $2.5 million...known as reserves.
http://www.naic.org/documents/industry_ucaa_chart_min_capital_surplus.pdf

Now say you have $3 million available for reserves and start up costs.
Now say you sell 1,000 people all age 35... yes I know that's an impossibility but the complexity of actuarial aspects is great. (I bet you have NO IDEA what an actuary does do you?)
Remember this is health insurance. You are telling people to pay you in Florida $3,881 per year.
Average Cost Of Health Insurance (2017)
So that's $3,881,700 in premiums ... WOW... that's great! happy days... Rich evil capitalist now is what you are!
But wait.... We forgot about paying claims... hmmm....
called Medical loss ratio the average health insurance company...
If an insurer uses 80 cents out of every premium dollar to pay its customers' medical claims and activities that improve the quality of care, the company has a medical loss ratio of 80%. A medical loss ratio of 80% indicates that the insurer is using the remaining 20 cents of each premium dollar to pay overhead expenses, such as marketing, profits, salaries, administrative costs, and agent commissions. The Affordable Care Act sets minimum medical loss ratios for different markets, as do some state laws.
Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) - HealthCare.gov Glossary
So out of the $3,881,700 in premiums...oh... no...that's $3,105,360...leaving what $776,340 for overhead, marketing, etc. and wait a minute FLORIDA requires RESERVES for future
claims... so that comes out of this $776,340 also!
And of course those idiots in Obamacare hating "profits" now forced insurance companies to pay out 85% or rebate the difference!

So Mr. President of the health insurance company after all these expenses of 85% or that leaves $582,255 to pay for salaries, marketing, etc. PLUS wait remember reserves.
This leaves based on national averages of net profits BEFORE TAXES... of less then 6% or $34,935! And this is before of about 53.5% (Aetna's taxes) TAXES!

So Mr. President of the Health insurance company... What is the profit on that $2.5 million required to start the insurance company in Florida ? 0.007%!
Wow what a return on investment!!!

You're feeling sorry for insurance companies now? That's nuts.

Practical. Knowledgeable. And total disbelief in the majority of you idiots in YOUR ignorance of how the economy works!
Dummies like you have NO idea what it takes to run a business. You believe all the crap and gross misinformation put out by the biased MSM that is also grossly misinformed!

 

[healthmyths]

Trump's "deregulating" everything is tantamount to....

....exactly what it appears to be: undoing everything his predecessors and opposers feel benefits the country. It is quite literally his imposing himself, his personal predilections, and authority on the nation. If his deregulation be endorsed by subsequent POTUSes, might it lead to consternation among the citizenry and, as you say, anarchy? I suppose it could. One thing I feel certain about is that some of his deregulatory fiats are making great little other than the fortunes of corporations that'd usurp and poison the rights and property that to us all belong.

OH those bIG evil corporations! When are you people going to come to the realization of one SIMPLE FACT!
These big evil corporations DEPEND on customers that are alive. Thriving. Making money to buy the goods and services these big evil corporations provide.
And while you are at decrying those BIG evil corporations ... you are so missing the point!
These big evil corporations don't worry about rules regulations ...i.e. they have employees to follow all these grossly bloated and stupid rules.
The small businesses LOVE Trump's anti-regulations attitude!
But people like you just believe that crap put out by the MSM of those evil businesses.
Just once think! If those EVIL businesses large and small did everything nasty and bad that you imagine...where would they be financially? Are you truly that dumb to think
that large and small businesses are out to screw the public? Of course you do because you are the ilk that the MSM depends on to believe their truly rare occasions where a small/large business screws up. The MSM then takes these rare and infrequent situations and blows them out of proportion...to sell their media!
Wake up and don't buy into the gross ignorance of the masses that believe the MSM's bloated and mostly fake "NEWS"!

 

[martybegan]

progressives seem to equate volume of regulation with it's level of effectiveness. People who actually work in the regulated industries would beg to differ.

Well, I do work in one of them, and I do agree that Democrats confuse volume of regulation with effectiveness.

But unfortunately, and as usual, the Republicans do precisely the same thing.
.

Where do they prefer volume over quality?

 

[Mac1958]

progressives seem to equate volume of regulation with it's level of effectiveness. People who actually work in the regulated industries would beg to differ.

Well, I do work in one of them, and I do agree that Democrats confuse volume of regulation with effectiveness.

But unfortunately, and as usual, the Republicans do precisely the same thing.
.

Where do they prefer volume over quality?

The lack of it. Cut, cut, cut, no matter what the consequences.

The mirror image of the Democrats, in perfect reversal.
.

 

[martybegan]

progressives seem to equate volume of regulation with it's level of effectiveness. People who actually work in the regulated industries would beg to differ.

Well, I do work in one of them, and I do agree that Democrats confuse volume of regulation with effectiveness.

But unfortunately, and as usual, the Republicans do precisely the same thing.
.

Where do they prefer volume over quality?

The lack of it. Cut, cut, cut, no matter what the consequences.

The mirror image of the Democrats, in perfect reversal.
.

You are assuming they are cutting whilly nilly, without regard to anything.

An example of them leaving things in is with the whole net neutrality thing. Providers are still required to publish any throttling as a notice to their customers.

 

[Mac1958]

progressives seem to equate volume of regulation with it's level of effectiveness. People who actually work in the regulated industries would beg to differ.

Well, I do work in one of them, and I do agree that Democrats confuse volume of regulation with effectiveness.

But unfortunately, and as usual, the Republicans do precisely the same thing.
.

Where do they prefer volume over quality?

The lack of it. Cut, cut, cut, no matter what the consequences.

The mirror image of the Democrats, in perfect reversal.
.

You are assuming they are cutting whilly nilly, without regard to anything.

An example of them leaving things in is with the whole net neutrality thing. Providers are still required to publish any throttling as a notice to their customers.

There are always exceptions. But look at the posts on this very board. Bring up the need for financial regulations (and I'm in the industry), and the righties immediately default to the standard one-sided talking points about the meltdown.

There is a point of equilibrium to this issue, and neither end seems terribly interested in finding it. So, we'll just continue to crash this way and that, since no one is communicating.
.

 

[martybegan]

progressives seem to equate volume of regulation with it's level of effectiveness. People who actually work in the regulated industries would beg to differ.

Well, I do work in one of them, and I do agree that Democrats confuse volume of regulation with effectiveness.

But unfortunately, and as usual, the Republicans do precisely the same thing.
.

Where do they prefer volume over quality?

The lack of it. Cut, cut, cut, no matter what the consequences.

The mirror image of the Democrats, in perfect reversal.
.

You are assuming they are cutting whilly nilly, without regard to anything.

An example of them leaving things in is with the whole net neutrality thing. Providers are still required to publish any throttling as a notice to their customers.

There are always exceptions. But look at the posts on this very board. Bring up the need for financial regulations (and I'm in the industry), and the righties immediately default to the standard one-sided talking points about the meltdown.

There is a point of equilibrium to this issue, and neither end seems terribly interested in finding it. So, we'll just continue to crash this way and that, since no one is communicating.
.

When Republicans actually remove more than the 5-10% of regulations they are aiming for, you may have a point. Until then let the weed cutters fly.

it's actually one of the few small government things they actually support, so I don't want to stop them.

 

[Mac1958]

Well, I do work in one of them, and I do agree that Democrats confuse volume of regulation with effectiveness.

But unfortunately, and as usual, the Republicans do precisely the same thing.
.

Where do they prefer volume over quality?

The lack of it. Cut, cut, cut, no matter what the consequences.

The mirror image of the Democrats, in perfect reversal.
.

You are assuming they are cutting whilly nilly, without regard to anything.

An example of them leaving things in is with the whole net neutrality thing. Providers are still required to publish any throttling as a notice to their customers.

There are always exceptions. But look at the posts on this very board. Bring up the need for financial regulations (and I'm in the industry), and the righties immediately default to the standard one-sided talking points about the meltdown.

There is a point of equilibrium to this issue, and neither end seems terribly interested in finding it. So, we'll just continue to crash this way and that, since no one is communicating.
.

When Republicans actually remove more than the 5-10% of regulations they are aiming for, you may have a point. Until then let the weed cutters fly.

it's actually one of the few small government things they actually support, so I don't want to stop them.

Well, that's pretty much my point.
.