I'm not putting my waders on to sort through that bullshit. Can you pull out one actual regulation contained in their plan? I'm guessing it's heavy on the tax cuts and subsidies and light on the actual regulation of activities.
Fundamental reason Govt needs to regulate corporations.
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
I'm not putting my waders on to sort through that bullshit. Can you pull out one actual regulation contained in their plan? I'm guessing it's heavy on the tax cuts and subsidies and light on the actual regulation of activities.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
No.... but you came very very close to doing just that. You provided a tiny amount of wiggle room for yourself, but that is all.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Why don't we approach it from the end that is appropriate?
MOTT made the comment that businesses oppose almost all reasonable regs. It is up to HIM to show evidence of such.
Asking someone else to prove that his assertion is incorrect is an assignment of responsibility that is not theirs in this debate. If he wishes to make such statements it is up to Mott to provide evidence of such.
He stated clearly that there is a long history of this... surely he wouldn't make such a comment if he didn't have the data to support it.
You are just trying to divert the topic in an attempt to put others on the defensive.
Either Mott should back up his claim.... or you both should cease with your nonsense.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
http://www.uschamber.com/issues/index/environment/default
you can scroll down to their policy positions and read what they do and do not support.
After you are done trying to cherry pick this organizations policies, perhaps then you will actually try to provide a list of all these reasonable regulations that businesses oppose.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
You are absolutely correct. The devil is in the details and the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Keep in mind too that no matter how reasonable a regulation is written, it can become unreasonable very quickly depending on how it is administered.
What troubles me mostly about most regulatory enforcement is that it appears the motivation for enforcement is not the benefits derived from the application of the law but in generating revenue. Most enforcement actions against the private sector tend to be the government levying very large fines for minor infractions against large companies with very deep pockets or they levy fines against small companies for questionable violations because they lack the resources to fight back while mid size companies tend to be ignored by these agencies because they lack deep pockets, employ substantial numbers of people and locally have significant political influence. I find that this sort of misadministration of the law goes a long way towards undermining the credibility of many sorts of reasonable regulations.
At this point there is no more regulations that should be enforced unless and until we get this choking thing we call our government back up and operating at MINIMUM levels. This is not the time for new plans, new regulations, new discounts, new anything. We don't have the money to sustain it.
Any good business owner knows it's time to tighten the belt. Stop all unnecessary spending and quit taxing and fining the living daylights out of the people who are finding it more and more difficult to make ends meet on a monthly basis.
Hello??? We're in crisis here.
It's like Obama thinks because there's still checks in the checkbook we can still spend like an effing drunken sailor on furlough in Thailand.
I know about the state and federal regualtions that protect our environmental and ecological resourses because I work with it daily! Some are necessary and will continue to be adhered to, while others are still ongoing long after the statutes and mandates have been met and in many cases exceeded.
You know; like those taxes that supposedly have a sunset!
Right. I provide an answer to your question, and your answer is: I won't read it!
Stick your fingers in your ears and scream, "la, la, la!"... It might even make you feel like you were right or something. We were holding a reasonable conversation, suddenly you tried a "gotcha" that didn't work and now you are acting like my 9 year old.
It shouldn't be too tough to point out the actual regulations in that document if there are any proposals in there for regulatory action. Just one would suffice. It's your contention that they proposed regulations. Well, what are they?
I gave a link to a huge pdf with regulation etc. that they support. Pretending it doesn't exist because you don't want to read it (won't 'wade through it') doesn't make it go away.
Being deliberately ignorant does not make you "right", it just makes you more obviously ignorant.
If it were a "huge pdf with regulation etc." it shouldn't be too difficult to identify one specific regulation that the Chamber supports in regard to energy and climate change.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
The federal government should ensure a stable regulatory environment for carbon sequestration and ensure that
regulations are ready when the technology is. These legislative and rulemaking processes should work in parallel with
technology development and take advantage of knowledge developed during large-scale sequestration demonstrations.
As directed by EPAct2005, the Minerals Management Service should issue regulations for the development of renewable
energy projects on the OCS and should continue to process permits for these projects in the interim
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I linked you to their policy section on the environment. In it, you can click on specific issues and see exactly what types of legislation they do and do not support.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i search huge documents alot...i know how to search docs...don't be a smart ass ok jackass....
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
lmao....some poster maybe said something YEARS ago and onceler gets one!!!
Right, because a link to all of it is too much for you, you'd rather just say, "No! I will maintain my obstinate ignorance rather than actually learn something!"
I'm good with that. You can maintain your ignorance. Let no man threaten your comfort zone.
Dude, I'm not inclined to try to separate the wheat from the chaff in that thing. From even a cursory review you can see it's tax cut/credit and subsidy heavy and extremely light on the regulation.