The American Politics thread

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Ikki

You already do. For example, the government doesn't send officers to your home to make sure you're the kind of person they want having kids by seeing if the risk factors in your life are likely to make them a criminal.

The position that I want the government to regulate certain things does not imply I want the government to regulate everything. It's how you are fending off charges of being an anarchist.

Originally Posted by Ikki

At least we're down to this point.

If you want it, you should pay for it. Not me or your neighbour who doesn't go out to eat or doesn't want to foot the bill for your lifestyle.

Maybe certain people can't afford all those expense. I consider such services to be a basic set of needs that must be satisfied so I don't have to worry about going into every building wondering if the whole thing is going to fall down on my head because there aren't any standards.

[Burgey]

Have thought of the "you ****s are ****ed" argument a few times. Think everyone has. Discretion the better part of valor in that regard.

[Flem274*]

Wasn't Ikki a lefty a month ago?

What are you going to be next month mate?

[Spark]

whatchoo talking about, these private regulation agencies never make mistakes

The FDA cited "serious design flaws" and a "lack of awareness" of safety standards at Jensen Farms as the likely sources of the bacterial contamination behind the deaths. But in a report issued this week, congressional investigators found the company that conducted a July safety audit at the farm, Bio Food Safety, gave it near-perfect marks despite finding three "major deficiencies."

they're not at all susceptible to market manipulation from companies wanting to cut costs in certain areas by not meeting all safety standards and hence gravitating towards the ones that are more likely to turn a blind eye to slightly less obvious and harder-to-trace issues, no. because of course the average consumer can immediately backtrace the food poisoning that's killing their family member back to some random processing factory halfway across the country, ofc, can pick the exact time, place, meal and spoonful which was contaminated.

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

The position that I want the government to regulate certain things does not imply I want the government to regulate everything. It's how you are fending off charges of being an anarchist.

No, it's not exactly the same. As a Libertarian I believe in the role of the courts and enforcement of those rules and statutory laws including the constitution. So police and defence are intrinsically linked to that.

For me, that line is much more defined. Whether people who have risk factors almost guaranteeing their children become criminals are concerned, they are an even bigger expense and worry to society. It is not just a matter of being sick.

Maybe certain people can't afford all those expense. I consider such services to be a basic set of needs that must be satisfied so I don't have to worry about going into every building wondering if the whole thing is going to fall down on my head because there aren't any standards.

Afford what? Looking at guides and agencies involved with the quality of food? You can do that for free, really. And even if there was a cost and they couldn't afford it...how could they afford to eat out then? It seems an unintelligible hypothetical. With all that said, I am yet to hear you justify why someone else should subsidise your lifestyle. In the end someone has to pay. The government is not some separate entity, the costs are still there. And, as I've argued in this thread before, it is a poor mechanism for keeping costs down and can be shown in a myriad of ways and examples.

Again, I point you to that article I linked at the end of one of my longer replies. It addresses the goods/services and risk factors involved. Read the first handful of pages if nothing else.

Originally Posted by Flem274*

Wasn't Ikki a lefty a month ago?

What are you going to be next month mate?

Haha, no, I haven't been a 'lefty' since around 06-07.

Originally Posted by Spark

whatchoo talking about, these private regulation agencies never make mistakes

Strawman. The argument is not: private regulation services don't make mistakes or even less than the FDA. The argument is no one can. And in doing so they can also cause harm - FDA is notorious for holding back on measures that have been proven to work elsewhere while people die so that they can cover their asses politically to a greater extent than is necessary. As well as being in cahoots with big Pharma. We've done that argument though...where you ended up saying that people were more concerned with how a drug was advertised than how it would ultimately work.

[Spark]

excuse me, i need to print out my latest 1000 page guide to the food safety standards to every restaurant in south east australia to carry around with me, knowing that i don't own an ipad or have global internet access on my phone and i would like to continue to partake in the commonplace practice of being to be able to eat where i want, when i want, on a whim and assume that i'm not going to place a death sentence on myself by doing so

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by Spark

excuse me, i need to print out my latest 1000 page guide to the food safety standards to every restaurant in south east australia to carry around with me, knowing that i don't own an ipad or have global internet access on my phone and i would like to continue to partake in the commonplace practice of being to be able to eat where i want, when i want, on a whim and assume that i'm not going to place a death sentence on myself by doing so

Strawman. You don't do that now, nor would you do that in the future. As a consumer you don't care if the joint you're in has extra bathrooms for it's employees or that it empties it's grease traps every 2 months instead of every 3 months. You just wanna know it's a good place to eat. Pretty simple to get that information and it doesn't require knowing the H&S standards.

Moreover, you can't do the above even with regulatory agencies. Places aren't inspected months at a time (at best) and they're reopened usually a few days after they're shut down for cleaning.

[Spark]

so you didn't actually read my posts on the issue?

cool.

i'm out. i have a brick wall i'd rather talk to.

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by Spark

they're not at all susceptible to market manipulation from companies wanting to cut costs in certain areas by not meeting all safety standards and hence gravitating towards the ones that are more likely to turn a blind eye to slightly less obvious and harder-to-trace issues, no. because of course the average consumer can immediately backtrace the food poisoning that's killing their family member back to some random processing factory halfway across the country, ofc, can pick the exact time, place, meal and spoonful which was contaminated.

You added the above.

If they are susceptible then they will lose their repute as an agency. That's why the competition for several of them will be good. Their incentive to stay alive and remain trustable acts as a safeguard for collusion. Whereas the FDA is the sole regulator, it is rife with risk and it happens repeatedly - again, just look at big pharma.

No one can backtrack illnesses, FDA or otherwise. Strawman.

Originally Posted by Spark

so you didn't actually read my posts on the issue?

cool.

i'm out. i have a brick wall i'd rather talk to.

As far as I know I've addressed all your points. If I haven't state it and show where I avoided it, if I did.

[Spark]

except the fda and equivalent can and do on a regular basis. that's how we KNOW where salmonella outbreaks come from in the first place. ffs. they don't just ****ing throw darts at a wall and see where it lands.

the reason the ^^^ won't happen is because the food producers have all the power. if they don't like a certain agency they will deny them access to the premises, and go with one more amenable to them. simple as that.

and no one will be able to tell the difference.

[Spark]

once again.

real ****ing world.

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by Spark

except the fda and equivalent can and do on a regular basis. that's how we KNOW where salmonella outbreaks come from in the first place. ffs. they don't just ****ing throw darts at a wall and see where it lands.

Um, what?

the reason the ^^^ won't happen is because the food producers have all the power. if they don't like a certain agency they will deny them access to the premises, and go with one more amenable to them. simple as that.

and no one will be able to tell the difference.

No, they will. Because the consumers demand it. That's where individual freedom meets individual responsibility. We must only buy products that are accepted as safe by private agencies. Then they will open their doors willingly. People already show preferences towards seals like the Heart Foundation and food businesses seek out their tick of approval - i.e. the real world.

http://www.heartfoundation.org.au/he...s/default.aspx
http://www.heartfoundation.org.au/Si...pping_List.pdf

[sledger]

Regulatory capture, anyone?

[Spark]

this is truly depressing.

i actually agree with american libertarians on many issues. i agree that government spending in certain areas - in particular healthcare and defence and their broken excuse of a social security system - is profilgate and needs to be fixed. i agree that the beauracracy is woefully inefficient and needs to be devolved to the states in the usa in large degree so a form of competitive federalism can take place (but it has to be coupled with a massive relaxation on immigration policy imo). i agree that because america is such a collossally large country by first-world standards it needs to be treated in a much smaller-government mindset to reduce inefficiencies.

but what you have done thus far is pick THE LAST TWO (well, ok, maybe not quite the last two, i would put airline safety standards last) industries i would ever, ever choose to totally deregulate. because the consequences of standard market forces is more dead people. and that is utterly unacceptable to me on any moral basis whatsoever.

sigh.

[Flem274*]

I've just noticed Spark has 21,000 posts in two years.