My Argument for Strict Regulation

[Razor]

The Scene: I am a teenaged fella, at about 17 years of age. I am in Arkansas Governor's School, a very prestigious 6-week program that is held in the summer. We have 4 classes, and they are split into three categories.

Class A-- What you went to AGS for. I went for Natural Science, so Monday/Wednesday/Friday I had two Class A Natural Sciences. It was fun.

Class B-- Our logic/debate class. I had a teacher named David Scott Cunningham, and he was the most legit professor ever. He dropped logic bombs left and right. He was the first man to leave me speechless in a debate. For reals.

Class C-- Our "feelings" class. Empathy, sympathy, all that good stuff.

Our scene involves Class C, the "feelings" class. We are playing a game of Monopoly, only the Banker gets to make up whatever rules they want. They can tax everyone, take no money from some, refuse to give properties to others, the like. Basically God of our Board, as it were.

What Happened: Our banker was a bitch. He let the hot chick (Who I was totally banging...okay, not really. Making out with her. We were ****es in AGS. No lie. Even my "Never had a girlfriend" friend got more than his fair share.) get whatever properties she wanted. He taxed me and the only other dude at the board $150 every time we passed Go. He doubled the purchase of properties when the hot chick expressed interest in them and someone else landed on them. One not-so-hot chick was treated better, but it was because she had bigger boobs. Seriously, that was his rational for it. (We were teenage ****es. What can I say?)

The Lesson: Do we not see the lesson here? Complete, uncontrollable reign over what you do in a business to your costumers only leads to the vast majority getting screwed. Healthcare companies, just to throw out an example , are extra guilty of this.

They regularly cut patients who are diagnosed with a chronic, treatable disease by raising their rates double, triple, even quadruple what they were. They regularly deny patients for health problems developed years and years earlier, some that some patients didn't even know about until the insurance physical. They are exempt from monopoly status, so they can effectively take over large expanses of states and work with the one other insurance company in the state to raise rates exponentially.

Who else is guilty of this?

Well, lawmakers. They have thrown out some big ole pieces of shit over the last decades. No Child Left Behind? The PATRIOT Act? The mangled Healthcare Reform Bill (that I maintain Pelosi and Reid fucked up beyond repair, not the President)?

Unions are a big problem with this. They, as I would argue, are singlehandedly responsible for the automaker collapse of 2008. They routinely hike rates up for workers to the point where you're paying outrageous sums for the man who puts screws into a car frame. Hell, he uses a fucking power drill. And he gets paid better than half of America. They know nothing but "We have your workers, and we'll leave if you don't give us 40 dollars an hour." The bus driver and teacher unions can singlehandedly shut down schools if they don't get what they want.

Basically, what I'm arguing is this.

1) We have to reign in entities that are showing themselves drunk on power. I don't know how when it comes to the Lawmakers, other than tarring and feathering them. Those fucking Tea Parties won't do a damn thing, especially after their fancy convention that spent $100,000 to get Palin to speak! Along with $500 steak and lobster dinners, of course.

2) Companies that are given too much freedom will not be lovey dovey and be your standard, moral person. They will fuck over the dudes and ugly chicks, while helping out the hot chicks because they think it'll get them laid. (Hopefully everyone gets that metaphor.)

Corrupt authorities have us by the balls. We are the dudes. We are the ugly chicks. A few of us are the hot chicks, sure. But not nearly enough. What are some ways we can Constitutionally limit federal and state lawmaking power? How about some reforms for Big Business that won't send FTS into a gagging fit? Do we even need regulation? Are you happy with some businesses committing what I would call "Gross crimes against the populace?"

Stake your claim.

 

[Dexter]

You have some good points... there certainly are some big evil corporations out there... but ultimately, what gives you the right? More specifically, are you sure you want to start combating one injustice with another?

I know I've preached this till I'm blue in the face and everyone around here (yourself in particular I'm sure, Razor) is sick of hearing it, but the answer to every problem isn't to go running to the government like a little kid tattling to the teacher and demand they do something about it. It's neither their job, nor their RIGHT to fix problems like this. I'm not telling you it's ok to fuck over the consumer. Of course it's not. It's just that your solution is just as bad as the problem.

So how DO you fix the problem then? Careful consumerism is a hell of a good start. For example, do you really NEED health insurance? Don't you think, if you're paying well over a thousand dollars a month for it (which is common and possibly even a low-end estimate) you might be better off in the long run just not having insurance, not going to the doctor every time you catch a sniffle, and just footing the bill for the occasional emergency? This goes a long way toward explaining why low income households can't afford insurance... the middle class put up with the insurance companies' bullshit for too long and stuck by them while they raised the price beyond anything reasonable.

That's just one, not particularly well fleshed-out, example but hopefully you take my point here. Revolutions aren't state-sponsored... they start with people like us having conversations like this, and eventually, hopefully, people decide they've had enough and they get up, go to their window, open it, stick their head out and yell that they're mad as hell and they're not going to take it anymore.

 

[lghikas]

SOME regulation is needed, and for anyone that doesn't think so take a trip down memory lane and look back at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire of 1911. Unions are good to an extent, when they are fighting for safety rights, but like you said when they got people making insane amounts of money for small or easy jobs.

Anyway on to Strict Regulations. Personally I believe that if a company is doing something the people with catch on and hopefully the company will fix whatever wrong doing they are doing. And if they don't the people will stop using said company and it will go out of business. But thats very unlikely to happen. People just don't want to seem to take the hassle and think that protesting will be a waste of time. I think they would be surprised at what they could get done.

Now on to who is setting the regulations. Your claim is that their are people only looking to make as much money as they want to and that they don't care about their consumers, and without there are. With that being said, I can say the same about the Government, not all elected officials are looking to selfless and serve there people. Who is to say that they won't try to make money quickly off by setting these regulations(on whatever). Next thing you know, from what started out as setting something small the government owns a big company(through the set regulations) and because you said the company is out a make a quick buck, you can't guarantee there wouldn't be someone like that in government. Just look at GE, Zucker and Imelt are using their friendships with The White House to suggest passing regulation that will help GE flourish as a business, same with a lesser known company called Serious Windows...The White House has said several times that they make the best "Energy Efficient" windows when rivals has stepped up disagreeing and sell theirs at a lower price. Here comes the kicker the companies Owner's wife is on a board for Weather for The White House.

So anyway it might look good on paper but both and just about every theory in general have flaws. If you gonna say a Company is out to just make as much money, who isn't to say someone isn't trying to do that in the government.

 

[FromTheSouth]

Well, Razor, this is an interesting topic, and I agree, we do need some regulation. The problem is that there is no one to regulate the government.

I must've missed the part of the Constitution where the government was allowed to buy up entire sectors of the American economy. I must have missed the part of the Constitution that said "Government shall make every law possible to restrict the access of good for working Americans in favor of handouts."

The government has taken away from the fundamental right of businesses to succeed in this economy by demonizing profits and trying force legislation upon people against their will. This government has gotten equality of opportunity mixed up with equality of economics, and that is wrong.

The government regulates too much. The government has regulated that The Canadian government gets to own 20% of GM. The American tax payers footed 100% of the bill to abil them out, only so the government can give away 20% of that money. The government is mandating that GM can only make economy cars, even though GM is supposedly a private company who should be conceding to the needs of it's consumers, not the whims of a pandering faux-environmentalist.

The government tried to increase regulations on the mortgage industry and it collapsed. The government completely regulates Amtrak and it is a disaster. The government runs the postal service, and it is incapable of matching the services provided by independent businesses such as UPS. Why should they get more control when they have exhibited nothing but gross incompetence time and again?

As far as your scenario with from AGS, your instructor failed to understand that the benefits he is providing the girls are already illegal. One can not discriminate based on race, gender, ethnicity, and the like. He was doing so to make a case for some kind of liberalism that was enacted in the 1960's. You wasted your time on that trip. At least you got your dick wet.

 

[Razor]

Well, Razor, this is an interesting topic, and I agree, we do need some regulation. The problem is that there is no one to regulate the government.

Oh come on. There's gotta be someone. The Governator? Oh, wait. He's got his ass busy with saving California from 19 billion dollars worth of debt.

Did you see the poll on the AP? 75% of adults in California think the state is taking the wrong course of action. Damn. I don't even think Bush scored that low in the height of "Cheney is a scary child murderer, and Bush lied to us" days.

I must've missed the part of the Constitution where the government was allowed to buy up entire sectors of the American economy. I must have missed the part of the Constitution that said "Government shall make every law possible to restrict the access of good for working Americans in favor of handouts."

In all fairness, there is that part about "Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness." Keeping someone from starving, ala Life, trumps Pursuit of Happiness, or keeping all of your money for yourself.

The government has taken away from the fundamental right of businesses to succeed in this economy by demonizing profits and trying force legislation upon people against their will. This government has gotten equality of opportunity mixed up with equality of economics, and that is wrong.

How so? Businesses can succeed. It's just that when you do, don't accept a billion dollar bailout because you're going to go bankrupt and take the economy with you, while you're giving out 100,000 million dollar bonuses.

The government regulates too much. The government has regulated that The Canadian government gets to own 20% of GM. The American tax payers footed 100% of the bill to abil them out, only so the government can give away 20% of that money.

That's fucked up. I haven't seen that anywhere though. Do you have a source? I bet it's Fox News.

The government is mandating that GM can only make economy cars, even though GM is supposedly a private company who should be conceding to the needs of it's consumers, not the whims of a pandering faux-environmentalist.

Now see, that's really fucked up. However, GM accepted the bailout from the government, or the American Public. So now the American Public gets the right to tell GM, as majority owners, what to make. And we elected our representatives to speak for us, so Congress is doing just that.

The government tried to increase regulations on the mortgage industry and it collapsed. The government completely regulates Amtrak and it is a disaster. The government runs the postal service, and it is incapable of matching the services provided by independent businesses such as UPS. Why should they get more control when they have exhibited nothing but gross incompetence time and again?

The government just went through how many years of lessening regulations on business? From Regan to Bush Jr? You can't tell me that what little regulations Bush put on there in the final months is what popped the bubble. I hold that Regan's failed "Trickle Down Theory" is what fucked the boat.

As far as your scenario with from AGS, your instructor failed to understand that the benefits he is providing the girls are already illegal. One can not discriminate based on race, gender, ethnicity, and the like.

Well, in all fairness, I was using the gender inequality as a metaphor. Consider the hot chick rich people, and the guys/big boobed chick the middle and lower class.

He was doing so to make a case for some kind of liberalism that was enacted in the 1960's. You wasted your time on that trip.

Have you ever seen "Guiding Hand?" It's an anti-AGS propaganda video. It was made by one of Bill Clinton's enemies I think, to try and hurt him when he was running to be reelected as governor or some shit like that. It's hilarious.

At least you got your dick wet.

Yeah. Not nearly as much as my gay friends, though. They were getting fucked every which way. I'm sure I would have had a great time if I liked the man penis.