Are you for or against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Really, please explain then why at times when US tax rates were considerable above what they are now, business and rich individuals did not all just leave the country? There are a host of reasons why it's completely impractical for most companies to just go and operate out of China or wherever.

Confusingly you have attempted equivalence of taxation to regulatory costs. No matter the reason lets assume for arguement sake you mean to state that increased governmental imposed costs of business are absorbed ad infinitum and that no amount of costs cant be born by industry as the US is a vast consumer market with nigh limitless demand.

Letting that absurdity pass lets look at the 'claim' that when tax rates were above where they are now business was not going out of country. Firstly understand the us corporate tax rate. As any ****** leftist will attest the conservative talking point that US corporate tax rates are among the highest in the world is deceptive. Point of the matter is the effective tax rate for US corporation is significantly lower than times past and Competitive. Course the effective tax rate is a function of how many deductions can be claimed (read lobbied for). I also would submit it is likely a bit darwinian in that those industries unable to carve out deductions likely move, diminish or fold. Thus what is left is a heavier weighting of industries that can claim exemptions and thus showing a lower effective taxation rate than nominal.

Back to the original equivalence of regulation and taxation, so goes the regulatory effects as well. Those successful at lobbying for their respective cause be they GE, Entergy, ADM et al. can by government mandate create markets out of thin air or prevent competitors from bringing solutions to market. Those not successful at the cost avoidance measures diminish die or move. Once upon a time there were competitive US industries in textiles, appliance manufacturing, and steel. Inability to deal with costs caused those industries to diminish die and ultimately move or be supplanted.

[KrazyHorse]

You're really boring today, aren't you.

FTFY.

At this point, I can safely say kentonio is a useless ****ing moron whose opinions are as pedestrian as they are idiotic.

My only question is whether or not he's a DL.

[DaShi]

Ah, so that's why GE, Entergy, and ADM have kept so much of their manufacturing business in America.

[Kidlicious]

The tea party has significantly more consistent and specific viewpoints than this group of whiny college students. The Tea Party at least has an overarching philosophy with more grounding than "I HATE BANKERS!"

The Occupy Wall Street group is a mishmash of people with self-conflicting ideas about the economy and government, like "government needs to stop taking away our rights" and "government needs to regulate more" as well as "banks should stop forcing people to pay back loans" along with "banks should be more willing to give out loans". It's ludicrous and pathetic. Whereas the Tea Party is basically "lower taxes and lower government services." That's not irrational and it's perfectly consistent. Whether or not it's optimal is questionable, but it's a legitimate point.

No. Just chanting "lower taxes" is idiodic. The truth be told they want to put more tax burden on the working man.

[Elok]

The tea party has significantly more consistent and specific viewpoints than this group of whiny college students. The Tea Party at least has an overarching philosophy with more grounding than "I HATE BANKERS!"

The Occupy Wall Street group is a mishmash of people with self-conflicting ideas about the economy and government, like "government needs to stop taking away our rights" and "government needs to regulate more" as well as "banks should stop forcing people to pay back loans" along with "banks should be more willing to give out loans". It's ludicrous and pathetic. Whereas the Tea Party is basically "lower taxes and lower government services." That's not irrational and it's perfectly consistent. Whether or not it's optimal is questionable, but it's a legitimate point.

No, the TP were/are jackasses too, and plenty inconsistent given how few of them actually wanted to cut military spending. They were/possibly still are a thoroughly heterogeneous batch as well, with their one point of clarity provided by Ronald Reagan around the time I was born. The "success" of the TP--purging the GOP of moderates and nearly forcing a default on our debt--makes me grateful that OWS appears, thus far, to be a prize batch of ****-ups with no clear goal beyond making noise.

Also, Kentonio, you seem to recall that there was a time when the TP enjoyed even broader support. They're now less popular than atheists...ah, the fickleness of public opinion.

[Sava]

WHAT is the point of regulations that exceed what we know is necessary to keep the public safe?

Because even though it's probably safe to swim in a pool with x% of pee... I'd rather swim in a pee-free pool.

And if someone has a business that requires peeing in the pool... well they can go **** themselves. Get a real job.

[The Mad Monk]

FTFY.

At this point, I can safely say kentonio is a useless ****ing moron whose opinions are as pedestrian as they are idiotic.

My only question is whether or not he's a DL.

Not a DL, you know where he's from.

[kentonio]

Confusingly you have attempted equivalence of taxation to regulatory costs.

Not that confusingly, I referred to taxation because the same argument is always used about individuals or business upping sticks and leaving the country. No-ones saying that over burdensome regulation is a positive thing, but the 'they'll just leave!' thing is not backed up by reality.

FTFY.

At this point, I can safely say kentonio is a useless ****ing moron whose opinions are as pedestrian as they are idiotic.

My only question is whether or not he's a DL.

At this point I have read enough of your vitriolic, narrowminded bull**** to safely tell you to go **** yourself you silly little man. Like so many in your line of work you have a shallow limited intellect which you mistake for genius. You react to opposing views with nasty, poisonous personal attacks because you are incapable of debating like an adult and accepting that perhaps someone else may have something to teach you. Maybe in your work the one who shouts loudest gets the biggest bonus, but in real life it just makes you sound like a *****.

[Hauldren Collider]

I don't think he is incapable of debating at all, I think he is simply unwilling to spend the time to debate people who are wrong on so many levels, but doesn't want to let them continue spouting claptrap unopposed.

[kentonio]

I don't think he is incapable of debating at all, I think he is simply unwilling to spend the time to debate people who are wrong on so many levels, but doesn't want to let them continue spouting claptrap unopposed.

Which is why he repeatedly appears in threads to tell people they're ****ing idiots who should just **** off, right? Because that's a healthy way to talk to people?

[Hauldren Collider]

I just think you are confusing inability with simple unwillingness.

[kentonio]

I just think you are confusing inability with simple unwillingness.

Not really confusing, despite my little rant I don't actually think he's mentally retarded. In this thread for instance he almost certainly knows far, far more about the subject than me and most others in here. He could almost certainly destroy any argument we had just by drawing on his knowledge, but instead he decides to just fling in a few nasty little insults.

I'm happy to argue from a weak position because then I learn more about the subject by losing. Sometimes the debate itself is the fun part. Having someone just sitting there acting superior without bothering to engage however is just dull.

[Hauldren Collider]

I don't think someone who is mentally retarded could actually get a job at Goldman Sachs in any position higher than janitor.

[kentonio]

Like I said I don't actually think he's mentally retarded, just rude and with delusions of superiority. I just don't see the point of posting in threads not to join in a discussion but just to insult people.

[Traianvs]

Kentonio, you really don't know **** do you? What exactly have you been fed about the free market? This concepts are well-understood and empirically provable.

You don't just approve of regulation, you approve of randomly changing regulation for the SOLE PURPOSE of ensuring companies have no clue exactly what the regulations are. And you think this helps the environment?

I think you need to dig deeper. Take the Porter hypothesis for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter_Hypothesis. I'm sure you haven't heard of it before, so check it out.

Besides, we're heading towards increased efforts to curb pollution and to increase sustainable development anyway. You can't turn that back. Entrepreneurs with a sound mind for business know this.

Whoever has the lead wins in the long term. Apparently, businesses in better (I said better, not more) regulated countries achieve better results on all fronts, in particular in that they're environmentally stronger and have healthier financial longterm prospects.

It's also got to do with business culture. A more responsible firm in general will do so in every domain, including the environment. Regulation helps firms to be responsible