dre Posted April 4, 2011 Report Posted April 4, 2011 The government already has regulations on the books regarding black lung disease, and I'm certain the unions have strict guidelines as well. he just doesn't think another rule will make a difference. Do you know why it is claimed to be recently on the rise? Firstly, is the claim true? Secondly, if true, is it possibly some sort of deregulation coupled with an increased demand for coal? Is the coal dustier? The filters clogged? Because Rand Paul doesn't support more government intervention doesn't mean he "likes the idea of exposing his constituents to black lung disease". I can't understand why someone as full of it as yourself doesn't see having to flush three times is simply inefficient and defeats the entire purpose of the change or that flickering, mercury filled bulbs are an advancement in lighting technology. Because Rand Paul doesn't support more government intervention doesn't mean he "likes the idea of exposing his constituents to black lung disease". That depends. Free market utopians like the Pauls definately do indirectly support consumers being harmed by dangerous products when they advocate deregulation. If you looke at most of the areas where regulation has emerged youll see that at some point the companies involved WERE allowed to regulate themselves, with disasterous consequences to the consumer. In Pauls world we still be using asbestos insulation and leaded gasoline. Consumers would be falling ill and dropping dead left right and center. In both of those cases the private sector was perfectly happy to sell these products to consumers.... leaded gasoline was sold for more than 60 years... asbestos insulation for about 20 - 30. In both cases the government had to use FORCE to stop these companies from killing consumers, and trashing the environment. So people with an ideological opposition to the "concept" of government regulation ARE indirectly encouraging those kinds of consequences. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Shady Posted April 4, 2011 Author Report Posted April 4, 2011 Apparently he has an aversion to functioning flush toilets too. Correction. He has an aversion to poorly functioning flush toilets. Quote
Shady Posted April 4, 2011 Author Report Posted April 4, 2011 That depends. Free market utopians like the Pauls definately do indirectly support consumers being harmed by dangerous products when they advocate deregulation. Complete nonsense. Deregulation doesn't mean no regulation. It's a common attack by the forces of anti-freedom. If you're not for all government regulation, then you want none of it. Quote
BubberMiley Posted April 5, 2011 Report Posted April 5, 2011 The Pauls have been consistently opposed to all forms of regulation. To them, even the civil rights act was over-reaching. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Pliny Posted April 5, 2011 Report Posted April 5, 2011 The Pauls have been consistently opposed to all forms of regulation. To them, even the civil rights act was over-reaching. It was. What they should have done was just repealed all the discriminatory laws and things would have eventually settled out. What kind of a society is it where you have to force people to treat each other civilly? Probably one where laws exist that promote discrimination. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
Oleg Bach Posted April 5, 2011 Report Posted April 5, 2011 It was. What they should have done was just repealed all the discriminatory laws and things would have eventually settled out. What kind of a society is it where you have to force people to treat each other civilly? Probably one where laws exist that promote discrimination. To discriminate means to choose what is of good quality and what is of less quality. To have the freedom of choice to say - one thing is good for me and that other thing is bad for me! There is nothing wrong with discriminatory thought. We all do it. BUT that thought dare not be spoken. Quote
pinko Posted April 5, 2011 Report Posted April 5, 2011 (edited) The government already has regulations on the books regarding black lung disease, and I'm certain the unions have strict guidelines as well. he just doesn't think another rule will make a difference. Do you know why it is claimed to be recently on the rise? Firstly, is the claim true? Secondly, if true, is it possibly some sort of deregulation coupled with an increased demand for coal? Is the coal dustier? The filters clogged? Because Rand Paul doesn't support more government intervention doesn't mean he "likes the idea of exposing his constituents to black lung disease". I can't understand why someone as full of it as yourself doesn't see having to flush three times is simply inefficient and defeats the entire purpose of the change or that flickering, mercury filled bulbs are an advancement in lighting technology. I have a high efficiency Australian toilet and it has definitely saved me money since I had it installed several years ago. Once Rand Paul gets his head out of his ass he should look into such cost effective measures. Edited April 5, 2011 by pinko Quote
WIP Posted April 5, 2011 Report Posted April 5, 2011 Why ? The current president took swipes at FOX ? They don't get to actually decide who runs the US at this time. For Republican candidates, the road to the Whitehouse passes through FoxNews. Rand must have been pissed over feeling ignored or not getting as much attention as some of the other Republicans. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
Shady Posted April 5, 2011 Author Report Posted April 5, 2011 (edited) For Republican candidates, the road to the Whitehouse passes through FoxNews. Not really. If that was the case, John McCain would never have won the Republican nomination. However, the Democrat candidate's road to the White House definitely passes through the mainstream media. They were practically an arm of the Obama campaign. Edited April 5, 2011 by Shady Quote
Pliny Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 I have a high efficiency Australian toilet and it has definitely saved me money since I had it installed several years ago. Once Rand Paul gets his head out of his ass he should look into such cost effective measures. Well, if you are happy with the efficiency of yours then good. When the legislation came into being the first "government approved" toilets didn't work too good at all and some still don't. They were a disaster. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
Pliny Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 Not really. If that was the case, John McCain would never have won the Republican nomination. However, the Democrat candidate's road to the White House definitely passes through the mainstream media. They were practically an arm of the Obama campaign. I feel a thrill running up my leg! Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
pinko Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 Well, if you are happy with the efficiency of yours then good. When the legislation came into being the first "government approved" toilets didn't work too good at all and some still don't. They were a disaster. I highly recommend the Caroma Dual Flush toilet. Quote
Shady Posted April 6, 2011 Author Report Posted April 6, 2011 I highly recommend the Caroma Dual Flush toilet. What's the cost of one of those? Quote
pinko Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 What's the cost of one of those? Around $400.00 as I recall. Quote
bud Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 rand paul is pretty awesome. i'm glad shady agrees with him and his stance on foreign aid. Quote http://whoprofits.org/
Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) rand paul is pretty awesome. i'm glad shady agrees with him and his stance on foreign aid. The Palestinians would be GREATLY hurt (at least in the short-term) if Rand Paul's ideas were implemented. You only like it because you think Israel depends on American foreign aid (about 1% of our economy), and you want to hurt Israel. What you're ignorant of, however, is that foreign aid to the Palestinians composes over 50% of their economy (I think about 40% of total foreign aid to the Palestinians comes from the USA in one way or another). In my view, eventually this needs to be done. Palestinians especially needs to get off of financial life support and feel the short-term hurt in order to be pressured into engaging in meaningful economic reform. No matter how much they fail, they keep getting more and more money. The incentives are all backwards. Foreign aid to the Palestinians, in my view, at the very least should be contingent on meaningful economic (as well as social/political) reform and development. In other words, they should only be rewarded if they show economic success. Edited April 6, 2011 by Bob Quote My blog - bobinisrael.blogspot.com - I am writing on it, again!
pinko Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 The Palestinians would be GREATLY hurt (at least in the short-term) if Rand Paul's ideas were implemented. You only like it because you think Israel depends on American foreign aid (about 1% of our economy), and you want to hurt Israel. What you're ignorant of, however, is that foreign aid to the Palestinians composes over 50% of their economy (I think about 40% of total foreign aid to the Palestinians comes from the USA in one way or another). In my view, eventually this needs to be done. Palestinians especially needs to get off of financial life support and feel the short-term hurt in order to be pressured into engaging in meaningful economic reform. No matter how much they fail, they keep getting more and more money. The incentives are all backwards. Foreign aid to the Palestinians, in my view, at the very least should be contingent on meaningful economic (as well as social/political) reform and development. In other words, they should only be rewarded if they show economic success. Maybe this is as good a time as any to discontinue foreign aid to Israel. Quote
Bob Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 Maybe this is as good a time as any to discontinue foreign aid to Israel. What would be the purpose of discontinuing foreign aid to Israel? What about foreign aid to the Palestinians (from many states and organizations)? What about foreign aid to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Lebanon, and other Arab/Muslim states? Quote My blog - bobinisrael.blogspot.com - I am writing on it, again!
bud Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 What would be the purpose of discontinuing foreign aid to Israel? What about foreign aid to the Palestinians (from many states and organizations)? What about foreign aid to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Lebanon, and other Arab/Muslim states? why does israel need $3 billion+ in welfare cheque every year? all foreign aid from the federal government should be cut off. Quote http://whoprofits.org/
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.