Page 75 of 231 FirstFirst ... 2565737475767785125175 ... LastLast
Results 1,111 to 1,125 of 3463
Like Tree48Likes

Thread: The American Politics thread

  1. #1111
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    Regulatory agencies look at the practices of production. They do not inspect every box or every single chocolate to make sure there isn't an outbreak. The argument here is whether the public will find and monopolise testing vs their being independent agencies.

    Why should methods of risk assessment or contamination control change because of that? I fail to see how you even came to that conclusion.
    you tell me. where the **** did this "trials" business come from?

    You do know regulatory agencies are funded not just by providing a service right? And let's say they are for-profit. What is your point? That they can be influenced? Sure, but in the end they're in competition. Once they approve something and it causes harm - especially if a rival regulator has denied it - their repute plumets.
    bit hard for the rival regulator to deny it if they've been denied access to the premises.

    Why are you assuming there would one or their would ultimately be a monopoly? You've gone from 1 to 5 with little understanding in what is being said.
    how much do you actually know about how markets work?

    Moreover, let's take that as the worst case scenario. It is still better than having a public body. The same body is prone to the same perversions.
    prone yes. guaranteed regulatory capture? **** no. fda ain't perfect, what you're suggesting is far worse.

    What is worse, however, is that a public body will remain indefinitely due to the monopoly position it has garnered through force - through legal means and funding through government. Or that it will ruin it's reputation and be re-built again as renamed body, still funding through government.
    indeed, and they will have far less incentive for capture because they do not require profit to survive. what they require is adherence to the laws of the land as decided by the elective representatives of the people.

    In a private framework that regulatory body is always at the mercy of competition - even if it takes that competition 100 years to get to a place to economically worry the rival and perverse body. But it is still much better because it has the possibility of doing that. Whereas the government gives you no possibility of doing that.

    I explained this to you before in the FDA and it seemed you understood and accepted it then. The same principle applies.
    even if it takes that competition 100 years to get to a place to economically worry the rival and perverse body.
    if it takes that competition 100 years
    100 years
    REAL ****ING WORLD.

    as for the rest... you're treating a completely hypothetical, probably impossible situation of "market perfection" as a basis to adopt a system which will probably lead to lower quality standards and result in how ever many needless deaths?

    good luck with that.

    So, you are definitively irresponsible. You do want others to chip in. The problem with this mentality is that it forgets that you also have to chip in for others.
    don't presume to ****ing judge me on the same self-centered scale as you. i'm perfectly aware that my taxes are keeping other people alive. and am perfectly happy to pay them. i expect the same in return and will NEVER apologise for it.

    you want a society that neither requires you to contribute to the well-being of its citizens and does not contribute to yours in return? move to ****ing somalia.

    Moreover, you forget some people don't want to have to pay for something you want because they have no need for it. And when such a thing is publicly funded it inevitably ratchets up in cost because of the waste of such a bureaucracy.
    where is this person who has no need for food?

    If such a thing is viable financially, then you and the people who think like you should use your own initiatives to pool your resources and buy what you want for the greater good. If it doesn't, why do you have to drag everyone with you?
    so they can actually stay alive.

    As I said, this is the most reprehensible mindset I can thing of. It is a testament to our indoctrination as citizens that we not only have this mindset prevalent, but we feel ENTITLED to it and if someone points it out we get angry at them for not living in their world.
    lol. spare us the cassandra tripe.

    Haha, but that is what I have been saying all along. My question is, why shouldn't there be a regulatory body - other than the courts (which is what I have been promoting for food business violations, so don't argue that to me)? Are mechanics subject to stringent checks? When they sell you a car part, is there an overview of prices they must adhere to? Does a regulatory body shut them down if they don't use the right part?
    oh, so it's not competition that will ensure that this magic uncaptured private regulatory body does its job, it's the courts! what a fascinating insight. so tell us: if my child is given toxic baby formula and dies, does it make me an irresponsible, entitled parent to take the company to court and sue their ****ing guts out? after all, i'm assuming that my baby was erroneuously entitled to not die. the company has no legal obligation to provide my child with safe baby formula, however. what a terrible person i must be!
    Last edited by Spark; 22-04-2012 at 07:40 AM.
    + time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +


    get ready for a broken ****in' arm

  2. #1112
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,594
    Quote Originally Posted by Spark View Post
    you tell me. where the **** did this "trials" business come from?
    It depends what you attribute to it. Donoghue v Stephenson? Or market forces ensuring that people who want to have buyers have to do right by them to attract more.


    bit hard for the rival regulator to deny it if they've been denied access to the premises.
    Why would they be denied? Again, it's the public interest for them to back regulating agencies. This is like saying why would someone buy an iPhone over an Android. People can pick and choose whose testing they agree with more. Bodies will establish their own reputation - some for being overly stringent if need be.

    how much do you actually know about how markets work?
    Evidently, far more than you. The grand majority of monopolies in human history have been by way of government.

    Milton Friedman - Monopoly - YouTube

    prone yes. guaranteed regulatory capture? **** no. fda ain't perfect, what you're suggesting is far worse.
    Haha, hardly. Remember we were talking about how it takes 500m-2b dollars just to bring a new drug to market. Who does that benefit? You are talking about a trillion dollar industry; does that help the big pharma or no?

    indeed, and they will have far less incentive for capture because they do not require profit to survive. what they require is adherence to the laws of the land as decided by the elective representatives of the people.
    They don't need profit because they have power. They determine what goes to market and what doesn't. In fact, that is far better power to have than making profit. Once you create a role for government in such an industry, it will obviously be lobbied and taken advantage of. This is a no brainer. You are assuming that politicians and public servants will do right by you and not take special interest money. Do we all laugh in unison now?

    I like my way: you make sure that they do the right thing because they can't make money other than by making consumers happy. They can't block competition and they can't force you to have it because it is "good for you".


    REAL ****ING WORLD.

    as for the rest... you're treating a completely hypothetical, probably impossible situation of "market perfection" as a basis to adopt a system which will probably lead to lower quality standards and result in how ever many needless deaths?

    good luck with that.
    Absolute codswallop. It is definitive: government control will at worst give a monopoly over an industry. There won't be competition. People already do needlessly die with the FDA. This is the reality.

    And even if there is competition, like in health insurance, they pervert the market so badly that free market forces can't work because they make up such a huge aggregate of spending.

    don't presume to ****ing judge me on the same self-centered scale as you. i'm perfectly aware that my taxes are keeping other people alive. and am perfectly happy to pay them. i expect the same in return and will NEVER apologise for it.

    you want a society that neither requires you to contribute to the well-being of its citizens and does not contribute to yours in return? move to ****ing somalia.
    Wrong, you are self-centered. And I don't mean this to insult you or upset you...I mean this as a definitive statement. You just said you expect others to chip in for you. Why? Are you special? Can others not have the right to spend their money as they wish?

    Say what you want about me, but if I could choose as a system for myself and others not to be taxed I would be much happier. That way we are all spending our money as we wish and not being told to at the behest of some special interest - well intentioned or not.

    Moreover, who says unless the government doesn't help others no one will? Persoanlly, I loan money and look after my grandmother while studying and working. And I can help her even more if I didn't have to subsidise your lifestyle.

    where is this person who has no need for food?
    Who said we are talking about someone eating food or not eating food. The analogy was regarding someone dining out. Or do you care to change the goal posts?

    And as for a regulatory body for all foods, again, just look at everything I've already proposed. It's not a matter of there being no regulatory bodies; just who will fund them.



    lol. spare us the cassandra tripe.

    oh, so it's not competition that will ensure that this magic uncaptured private regulatory body does its job, it's the courts! what a fascinating insight. so tell us: if my child is given toxic baby formula and dies, does it make me an irresponsible, entitled parent to take the company to court and sue their ****ing guts out? after all, i'm assuming that my baby was erroneuously entitled to not die. the company has no legal obligation to provide my child with safe baby formula, however. what a terrible person i must be!
    You don't have to read very much in the last few pages to know what I think of the courts and their role in the free markets. They are essential and it has very little to do with the responsibility we have been talking about here. And a right to life is a big facet of individual liberty, FTR.

    It is a testament to the fact that you not only can't see beyond your nose in terms of your ideology, but that you don't even read the posts you are replying to when you respond in your indignant fashion. It goes right along with the self-centred theme that's come up.

    You tell me that the company has no legal obligation to provide you with safe baby formula...except they do...it's called having a duty of care. It is tort law. It is a very big part of the free market. Do me a favour and never ask if I know something about the free market if you do not even know one of it's very basic tenets. Especially the kind I subscribe to, and the videos/words of Friedman I have linked to on several occasions here.

    With all due respect, the last paragraph shows you clearly do not know what you are talking about here. What was your area of study and what about this discussion relates to it?
    Last edited by Ikki; 22-04-2012 at 08:11 AM.
    ★★★★★

  3. #1113
    International Coach Pothas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Surbiton, UK
    Posts
    11,610
    Jesus this argument is still going?

    How many pages of crap should I bother reading?

  4. #1114
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,421
    where are these privately funded courts of which you speak


  5. #1115
    Spanish_Vicente sledger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity
    Posts
    31,589
    Quote Originally Posted by Pothas View Post
    Jesus this argument is still going?

    How many pages of crap should I bother reading?
    I really wouldn't, if I were you.

  6. #1116
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    32,629
    Oh, its all good.
    Indians can't bowl - Where has the rumour come from as I myself and many indian friends arwe competent fast bowlers ?

    With the English bid I said: Let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote. They then became sad and left

  7. #1117
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,594
    Quote Originally Posted by Spark View Post
    where are these privately funded courts of which you speak
    Why would courts be privately funded? They are upholding the laws created by governments. I'll do you the courtesy of explaining my position again: courts are a very important part of free markets and they provide remedies for negligence and acts of fraud and misrepresentation. If you care to read about something before believing you have the requisite knowledge in insulting the opposition it, you'll get far more satisfaction out of this debate and so will I.

    Here's a simple debate that relates to your point. One of my favs by Friedman. It touches on the role of the courts.

    Milton Friedman on Self-Interest and the Profit Motive 2of2 - YouTube

    You should also read up on 'duty of care'. Otherwise this discussion is pointless for the mechanisms I believe that will keep people safe are oblivious to you.
    Last edited by Ikki; 22-04-2012 at 08:22 AM.

  8. #1118
    Spanish_Vicente sledger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity
    Posts
    31,589
    Stop linking us to your fap material ffs.

  9. #1119
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,594
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    Stop linking us to your fap material ffs.
    Literally laughing.

  10. #1120
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,421
    so:

    on one hand, we have a body designed to enforce the laws of the land and mete out punishments if those standards are not met. this body is publicly funded. it is the fda and it is the worst thing ever.
    on the other, we have a body designed to enforce the laws of the land and mete out punishments if those standards are not met. this body is publicly funded. they are the courts and it is the solution to everything.

    logic.

  11. #1121
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    32,629
    i don't think the role of the fda has ever seriously been questioned, even in this current, crazy climate, yet here we are

  12. #1122
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,421
    ps. look forward to the day that we get multi-resistant strains of ****ing everything because the govt let industry self-regulate antibiotic supplements. capital idea.

  13. #1123
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Death Queen Island
    Posts
    12,594
    Quote Originally Posted by Spark View Post
    so:

    on one hand, we have a body designed to enforce the laws of the land and mete out punishments if those standards are not met. this body is publicly funded. it is the fda and it is the worst thing ever.
    on the other, we have a body designed to enforce the laws of the land and mete out punishments if those standards are not met. this body is publicly funded. they are the courts and it is the solution to everything.

    logic.
    No, they're not the same. One set of laws sanctions one individual hurting another against his consent or knowledge. If I want to go to a place and digest something in my body through my own free will then why should I be stopped? Should that place, for example, be closed because it doesn't have the right dimensions for it's street signs?

    The FDA imposes standards that it has made for itself - or, secretly for the benefit of big pharma - purporting for the safety of others. It can't actually guarantee safety and in many cases has actually hurt more people by making everyone adhere to their standards.

    Remember the example of TRIS I gave regarding inflammable sleepware requirements which in turn turned out to be a carcinogen? In that case, the regulatory agency caused directly the death and sickness of many people by requiring all sleepware makers to use TRIS.

    The point is you cannot legislate out harm. It is one thing to provide remedy after being harmed; it is another thing to proactively determine standards and limit the free will of consenting people.

    Friedman on FDA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZL25NSLhEA
    Last edited by Ikki; 22-04-2012 at 08:42 AM.

  14. #1124
    Spanish_Vicente sledger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity
    Posts
    31,589
    I wonder if Friedman ran out in front of a bus...no,nevermind.

  15. #1125
    cpr
    cpr is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year cpr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    9,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post


    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.
    They don't, which is a shame. This is my no 1 campaign point when I run for office. Admittedly it'll take a generation before CC is worth posting in again, but I'm doing it for the future of this planet.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spikey View Post
    if people don't want to eat food that will kill them they won't eat food that will kill them, you morons.
    Yeah, I'm with this point. Quite frankly I don't particularly care about the rest, so long as the price is reasonable and the waiters not scratching his balls, I'll venture in. If I see a cockroach before I see my starter, I'll leave.

    Can someone tell me (in less than 4 pages) why we are arguing about regulating restaurants?
    "All are lunatics, but he who can analyze his delusions is called a philosopher." - Ambrose Bierce
    Langeveldt: I of course blame their parents.. and unchecked immigration!
    GingerFurball: He's Austrian, they tend to produce the odd ****ed up individual
    Burgey: Be careful dealing with neighbours whose cars don't have wheels but whose houses do.
    Uppercut: Maybe I just need better strippers



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The British Politics Thread
    By cover drive man in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 3640
    Last Post: 14-08-2014, 06:37 AM
  2. Media
    By SirBloody Idiot in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 06-08-2011, 06:10 AM
  3. FAQ & Introduction Thread
    By Samuel_Vimes in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 20-06-2011, 11:06 AM
  4. Finally ! A Last Word Thread
    By SJS in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 07:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •