Author Topic: 1st amendment follies  (Read 3393 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 1st amendment follies
« Reply #30 on: September 11, 2014, 07:55:44 PM »
  I have recently been told that it is easier to start a business in Communist China than in the USA.

    This was not always true .

      How come we have nine or ten percent unemployment , but need to import sixteen percent of our workforce?

       Really it is easy to believe that if the government got off the back of the employers and potential employers we could have 100% employment the next day.


YEP
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 1st amendment follies
« Reply #31 on: September 11, 2014, 08:46:05 PM »
In what ways is the government on the backs of employers?
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 1st amendment follies
« Reply #32 on: September 11, 2014, 10:10:00 PM »
  It depends on the industry.

   Think about the one that made you upset.

   When in Texas they increased the requirement on abortion clinics such that about half of them closed.

    Consider that these are the same requirements already applied to all the other outpatient clinics, so I do not consider this to be especially egregious.

  Ort consider me , OSHA will ensure I am fired if I do not wear hearing protection (earplugs) in designated areas, even when these areas are silent. They also require that I wear a fall harness with a six foot lanyard to stop my fall anytime I work near a four foot drop.

      There are regulations that are needed and helpful, but these get lost in the mass of regulations that are useless or counterproductive.

     The government has a strong preference for businesses that are large and prepared to deal with volumes of regulations, small businesses are held to the same standards as mega businesses that can have a permanent staff of lawyers and accountants.

      Anecdotes abound of inspectors becoming petty tyrants , even though lots of civil servants are sincerely doing the best work they are allowed to do.
 
       The sad truth is that most of the anti-regulation emotion is flowing from people who have had some ridiculous regulation enforced on them, and the reams of regulations never shrink or simplify.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U0OqJqNbbs

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 1st amendment follies
« Reply #33 on: September 11, 2014, 11:28:14 PM »
The Texas legislature was uninterested in the safety of patients: their goal was to shut down the clinics. I agree that is one case of excess regulation, but not typical.

I would say that applying the same standards of hygiene to both  McDonalds and Joe's Diner makes sense. Allowing Joe to poison diners because he only has a small operation does not seem to make sense.

The college where I taught is complaining that they have to provide attendance figures for every student every day to justify the government paying Pell Grants. Thios seems logical to me. It is a nuisance to the instructors, but I always took roll, and then transcribed the figures to the administration, because they requested it and I thought it made sense. Why should the government pay tuition for a student who attends three classes and flunks out? At some point I realized that I was the only one doing this, and the administration was not reporting attendance after all. Now they are actually requiring it, because the Feds are cracking down.

It is devilishly hard to get useful figures from most colleges. For example, what percentage of freshmen entering in 2014 will graduate with a BA by the end of 2019?
What percentage of each major find a job in their field within a year of graduation, and what was the salary?

In all the years I taught, I never heard one college official state the actual full time enrollment. This is a FTE, or full time equivalent, because not all students are full time.
They would generally give reports from recruiters.

I was a college dropout. I dropped out of a program at Barry University because their promise that they had the courses and resources to teach me how to write software, and I dropped out of Miami Dade Community College after I completed three courses in desktop publishing, because they taught me all I needed to know. But I was not getting government funding.


"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 1st amendment follies
« Reply #34 on: September 11, 2014, 11:39:40 PM »
The Texas legislature was uninterested in the safety of patients: their goal was to shut down the clinics. I agree that is one case of excess regulation, but not typical.

I would say that applying the same standards of hygiene to both  McDonalds and Joe's Diner makes sense. Allowing Joe to poison diners because he only has a small operation does not seem to make sense.



  These two statements do not match, why should there be a high standard for outpatient treatment centers of all kinds in Texas , except for Abortion clinics , which can have a lower or no standard?

The government can wipe out a small business with a requirement for filling out forms that no one will read , but these forms would be a proportionally small burden on a big business , so since forms never die and tend to grow and multiply there is a strong bias in regulations generally favoring big businesses over small ones.

Requiring cleanliness and cold refrigeration is reasonable in any food related business, requiring an hundred pounds of forms be filled out is a bigger deal to the small one (remember most of that information from the forms does not get used.)
Quote

The college where I taught is complaining that they have to provide attendance figures for every student every day to justify the government paying Pell Grants. Thios seems logical to me. It is a nuisance to the instructors, but I always took roll, and then transcribed the figures to the administration, because they requested it and I thought it made sense. Why should the government pay tuition for a student who attends three classes and flunks out? At some point I realized that I was the only one doing this, and the administration was not reporting attendance after all. Now they are actually requiring it, because the Feds are cracking down.

It is devilishly hard to get useful figures from most colleges. For example, what percentage of freshmen entering in 2014 will graduate with a BA by the end of 2019?
What percentage of each major find a job in their field within a year of graduation, and what was the salary?

In all the years I taught, I never heard one college official state the actual full time enrollment. This is a FTE, or full time equivalent, because not all students are full time.
They would generally give reports from recruiters.

I was a college dropout. I dropped out of a program at Barry University because their promise that they had the courses and resources to teach me how to write software, and I dropped out of Miami Dade Community College after I completed three courses in desktop publishing, because they taught me all I needed to know. But I was not getting government funding.

  Hmmm....... didn't know about that.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 1st amendment follies
« Reply #35 on: September 11, 2014, 11:49:12 PM »
That is not what the Texas law said. Bah. You are making up shit.

The law was designed to make running the clinics difficult to impossible, because Roe v. Wade says that abortions are legal.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 1st amendment follies
« Reply #36 on: September 12, 2014, 12:02:36 AM »
That is not what the Texas law said. Bah. You are making up shit.

The law was designed to make running the clinics difficult to impossible, because Roe v. Wade says that abortions are legal.

  Nope.

   The requirements of the Texas law are not mor eonerous than the requirements applied to other clinics.

    The difference is hyperbole.

     Unless the protection of Abortion requires that abortion mills be cramped and dirty there is little to object about.

      I actually know the answer to this one, but I bet you will have trouble with how tricky it is.

      One of the "onerous" requirements is that one of the abortion clinics doctors must have admitting priveledges in a nearby hospital. Typically there are dozens of qualified such doctors at every hospital.

      What keeps an abortion mill from meeting this requirement by taking an unpaid partner who is already a Dr. with admitting privileges?

        We are talking about a small number of clinics in the first place, each one could be saved by one such willing Doctor.

     Well , if they were also willing to remodel or move into a building with wide halls and clean up a bit.

      Every cosmetic surgery clinic in Texas copes with these same regulations by meeting the standard, does Abortion really need to be protected from cleanliness?