Dean's "Re-Regulation" Of American Business

[Ned]

Originally posted by Ramo
The answer isn't painful as Dean has clearly stated what he wants to do - include labor standards (i.e. no slavery) in free trade agreements. I was just making a comment on your belief that a speech condemning slavery (a revolutionary act... 150 years ago maybe) is a substantial action, while clearly, Shrub has done jack **** about trying to stop it.

So this is how the left views slavery? Just as low-cost competition?

Labor laws and treaties will do nothing about female slavery for prostitution.

As to Bush, he has called forcefully in the UN for slavery's elimination as an abomination. Narry a Democrat or anyone on the left has joined in this call AFAIK.

The left exhibits once again it moral bankruptcy.

And, oh, Ramo. I heard a story the other day that some Islamic cleric said that slavery was part of Islam, part of Jihad.

Any comment?

[Adam Smith]

Originally posted by realpolitic
While we're at it, maybe AS would like to deregulate the HazMat trucks in America. That would also save money, until one explodes, or irradates a city.

Hazmat has its own set of issues, so please don't try putting words in my mouth. If a hazmat trucker has a sufficiently bad accident, he goes bankrupt and avoids paying for the damage he caused. He therefore has insufficient incentive to operate safely, and some form of regulation is required.

[Ramo]

So this is how the left views slavery? Just as low-cost competition?

That view is not implied from such policies. Most on the real left who advocate such policies are thinking on the part of the oppressed, and wish to use them to pressure other countries into protecting the liberty of labor instead of dismantling their welfare states. It's true that the view is representative of part of the, but it's primarily the more conservative, nationalistic elements that support them.

And it's certainly better how the right views slavery: a good thing.

Labor laws and treaties will do nothing about female slavery for prostitution.

Labor laws are intended to prevent slavery. That's what they do; protect the liberteis of workers. Including female slavery for prostitution.

As to Bush, he has called forcefully in the UN for slavery's elimination as an abomination. Narry a Democrat or anyone on the left has joined in this call AFAIK.

Because, Shrub isn't really doing anything but irrelevent PR. Where are the associated policy changes? It's meaningless blather.

The left exhibits once again it moral bankruptcy.

And apparantly the right exhibits once again its idiocy.

And, oh, Ramo. I heard a story the other day that some Islamic cleric said that slavery was part of Islam, part of Jihad.

Any comment?

And oh Ned, I heard a story the other day that some Christian preacher said that duty to bomb abortion clinics is party of Christianity, part of defending the faith.

Any comment?

And I'd be interested in seeing that exact quote, since it looks like made up bull**** to me. What does slavery have to do with jihad?

And if you didn't get the message, crazy people say crazy things all the time. That doesn't mean they're representative of everyone who claim the same religion. And what does this have to do with Dean anyways?

[TCO]

Originally posted by Ramo


Not that much. The average campaign contribution is IIRC, around $70.

Get a clue.

The funds I'm referring to are soft, very soft, money. The average donor size has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. There are several large funds not explicitly associated with the Democratic party, but for practical purposes dedicated to that cause. They have sprung up just this year to get around campaing finacne reform. This was a well-reported story. Get with the picture.

[HershOstropoler]

Another hilarious thread. But there's one thing I wonder about:

Originally posted by Adam Smith

One side effect is that regs like this freeze technology. For example, US railroad signal boxes use vacuum tubes adn relays, because it would literally take an Act of Congress to allow the use of integrated circuits.

Why would anyone mandate a specific technology? Is there no best available technology standard in railroad safety regulation?

[TCO]

Best available has problems too. Look at FDA GMP wrt pharma factories. The vendors love it. Bar keeps moving further and further.

[HershOstropoler]

BAT is moving by definition. Makes sense if you don't want to rely on specific limits. But requiring sepcific technology is a bit odd.

[Ned]

Ramo, The right favor's slavery? The religious right is the party that ended it in England and the United States. Recall that it is you Democrats that were the party of slavery, for slavery and upon slavery. You have never done anything meaningful to stop it. Even today, you keep the black man is a new form of separate but equal called the welfare state where they can stay in their ghetto permanetly, supported by welfare.

[Az]

Yes Ramo, all of you damn democrats!

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
Ramo, The right favor's slavery? The religious right is the party that ended it in England and the United States. Recall that it is you Democrats that were the party of slavery, for slavery and upon slavery. You have never done anything meaningful to stop it. Even today, you keep the black man is a new form of separate but equal called the welfare state where they can stay in their ghetto permanetly, supported by welfare.

Those Democrats were not liberals. Your problem is that you still think the Republicans are the party of Lincoln. Lincoln was a liberal, not a conservative. Learn some history.

[TCO]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
BAT is moving by definition. Makes sense if you don't want to rely on specific limits. But requiring sepcific technology is a bit odd.

Yes...of course that is the benefit. What I am saying is that I have been in that field and things can get goldplated and overkill.

[HershOstropoler]

Depends on whether "available" includes an economic criterion. It usually does.

[Adam Smith]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler Why would anyone mandate a specific technology? Is there no best available technology standard in railroad safety regulation?

There is no "best available", and no "subject to cost" criterion. Its just "use this specific technology", which was state of the art at the time the regs were written in the late 60's. The reason might have been that railroads were viewed as a mature industry, not likely to experience technical change.

Another example of technology frozen in place is train brakes. Since 1869 brakes have been powered by compressed air, which is what the regs allow. There are now electronically activated brakes, which activate much quicker and stop trains sooner. Again, it will literally take and Act of Congress to allow these into use.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Those Democrats were not liberals. Your problem is that you still think the Republicans are the party of Lincoln. Lincoln was a liberal, not a conservative. Learn some history.

Lincoln was primarily a pro-business Whig. And yes, he was for radical change. But in terms of values, there is no difference at all between the party of Lincoln and the Republican Party today. It is the home of pro-business types and the religious, just as it was then.

Liberalism once was a force for free trade. Today it seems to be a force for protectionism, socialism and hate.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned


Lincoln was primarily a pro-business Whig. And yes, he was for radical change. But in terms of values, there is no difference at all between the party of Lincoln and the Republican Party today.

I leave the burden of proof to you since it is common knowledge that this isn't true.