Unfettered capitalism is evil

evince said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staggers_Rail_Act#Impact


Impact[edit]
Studies of the rail industry showed dramatic benefits for both railroads and their users from the alteration to the regulatory system.[2]:253–4 According to studies by the Department of Transportation's Freight Management and Operations, railroad industry costs and prices were halved over a ten-year period, the railroads reversed their historic loss of traffic (as measured by ton-miles) to the trucking industry, and railroad industry profits began to recover, after decades of low profits and widespread railroad insolvencies.[5] In 2007 the Government Accountability Office reported to Congress, "The railroad industry is increasingly healthy and rail rates have generally declined since 1985, despite recent rate increases.... There is widespread consensus that the freight rail industry has benefited from the Staggers Rail Act."[6]
The Association of American Railroads, the principal railroad industry trade association, stated that the Staggers Act has led to a 51 percent reduction in average shipping rates, and $480 billion has been reinvested by the industry into their rail systems.[5]
Click to expand...

another Desh cut and paste. Another example that the moron Desh doesn't understand what she is trying to discuss.

Tell us Desh... is the above GOOD or BAD?
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Carrier_Act_of_1980


Background[edit]
Motor carrier deregulation was a part of a sweeping reduction in price controls, entry controls, and collective vendor price setting in United States transportation, begun in 1970-71 with initiatives in the Richard Nixon Administration, carried out through the Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter Administrations, and continued into the 1980s, collectively seen as a part of deregulation in the United States.
Since the passage of the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, the federal government had regulated various transportation modes, starting with the railroad industry, and later the trucking and airline industries. Increasing public interest in deregulation led to a series of federal laws beginning in 1976 with the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act. The deregulation of the trucking industry began with the Motor Carrier Act of 1980, which was signed into law by President Carter on July 1, 1980.
Studies of the legislative process leading up to passage of the MCA indicate that the Act resulted from a concert of action by the Carter Administration, Congressional leaders, including Senator Ted Kennedy, an extensive coalition of "civil society" organizations which was a follow-on to coalitions created for rail and air transport regulatory reforms, and Interstate Commerce Commissioners appointed by Presidents Nixon and Carter who supported the pro-competition objectives of the legislative initiatives of 1971 to 1980 (notably A. Daniel O'Neal and Darius Gaskins).[citation needed]
The MCA was envisioned to be a sweeping de-regulation of the trucking industry. When President Carter signed the bill, he proclaimed:
This is historic legislation. It will remove 45 years of excessive and inflationary Government restrictions and redtape. It will have a powerful anti-inflationary effect, reducing consumer costs by as much as $8 billion each year. And by ending wasteful practices, it will conserve annually hundreds of millions of gallons of precious fuel. All the citizens of our Nation will benefit from this legislation. Consumers will benefit, because almost every product we purchase has been shipped by truck, and outmoded regulations have inflated the prices that each one of us must pay. The shippers who use trucking will benefit as new service and price options appear. Labor will benefit from increased job opportunities. And the trucking industry itself will benefit from greater flexibility and new opportunities for innovation.[2]
 
evince said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Carrier_Act_of_1980


Background[edit]
Motor carrier deregulation was a part of a sweeping reduction in price controls, entry controls, and collective vendor price setting in United States transportation, begun in 1970-71 with initiatives in the Richard Nixon Administration, carried out through the Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter Administrations, and continued into the 1980s, collectively seen as a part of deregulation in the United States.
Since the passage of the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, the federal government had regulated various transportation modes, starting with the railroad industry, and later the trucking and airline industries. Increasing public interest in deregulation led to a series of federal laws beginning in 1976 with the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act. The deregulation of the trucking industry began with the Motor Carrier Act of 1980, which was signed into law by President Carter on July 1, 1980.
Studies of the legislative process leading up to passage of the MCA indicate that the Act resulted from a concert of action by the Carter Administration, Congressional leaders, including Senator Ted Kennedy, an extensive coalition of "civil society" organizations which was a follow-on to coalitions created for rail and air transport regulatory reforms, and Interstate Commerce Commissioners appointed by Presidents Nixon and Carter who supported the pro-competition objectives of the legislative initiatives of 1971 to 1980 (notably A. Daniel O'Neal and Darius Gaskins).[citation needed]
The MCA was envisioned to be a sweeping de-regulation of the trucking industry. When President Carter signed the bill, he proclaimed:
This is historic legislation. It will remove 45 years of excessive and inflationary Government restrictions and redtape. It will have a powerful anti-inflationary effect, reducing consumer costs by as much as $8 billion each year. And by ending wasteful practices, it will conserve annually hundreds of millions of gallons of precious fuel. All the citizens of our Nation will benefit from this legislation. Consumers will benefit, because almost every product we purchase has been shipped by truck, and outmoded regulations have inflated the prices that each one of us must pay. The shippers who use trucking will benefit as new service and price options appear. Labor will benefit from increased job opportunities. And the trucking industry itself will benefit from greater flexibility and new opportunities for innovation.[2]
Click to expand...

another Desh cut and paste... tell us DESH... is the above GOOD OR BAD?
 
Superfreak said:
another Desh cut and paste. Another example that the moron Desh doesn't understand what she is trying to discuss.

Tell us Desh... is the above GOOD or BAD?
Click to expand...

this is not about me asshole


this is about FACTS


look at what was posted about it from the FACTS


it worked according to several studies huh asslick.


some times we need the TOOL of deregulation to fix things


some times we need the TOOL of regulation to fix things
 
evince said:
this is not about me asshole


this is about FACTS


look at what was posted about it from the FACTS


it worked according to several studies huh asslick.


some times we need the TOOL of deregulation to fix things


some times we need the TOOL of regulation to fix things
Click to expand...

LMAO... I know each of the bills I cited you moron. You said YOU would discuss the bills. You LIED.

You simply cut and paste from Wiki. YOU LIED.
 
january 2007

https://www.kattenlaw.com/files/...to Implement Bank Broker Provisions of Gr.pdf


SEC Proposes Regulation R to Implement Bank Broker Provisions of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
I. Introduction The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has issued proposed rules1 in conjunction with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”) that would implement and clarify certain exceptions for banks from the definition of “broker” under Section 3(a)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). As a matter of background, the bank broker exceptions, created by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLBA”), replaced the blanket exclusion to the definition of “broker” that banks previously enjoyed. Among other things, GLBA amended several federal statutes regulating the activities of banks, changed the way in which supervisory responsibilities over the banking and securities industries are allocated, and eliminated many of the barriers between the banking and securities industries created by the Banking Act of 1933, more commonly known as the Glass-Steagall Act.
Proposed Regulation R seeks to change the 2001 SEC interim final rules and 2004 proposed Regulation B, both of which were criticized by the banking industry and members of Congress as inadequately implementing the provisions of GLBA. If Regulation R is adopted, Regulation B will be officially withdrawn, and banks will, subject to the rule, be able to compete for business with the securities industry without having to register as a broker or dealer.
Section 3(a)(4)(B) of the Exchange Act provides eleven conditional exceptions to the definition of “broker” for banks engaging in certain securities activities. The proposed rules, as detailed below, affect securities activities in connection with four of the eleven exceptions: (1) third-party networking arrangements, (2) trust and fiduciary activities, (3) sweep activities, and (4) safekeeping and custody.
II. Third-Party Networking Arrangements The third-party networking exception in Exchange Act Section 3(a)(4)(B)(i) allows a bank to avoid “broker” status where it enters into a written agreement with a registered broker-dealer under which the broker-dealer offers its services to bank customers (the “Networking Exception”). Under the Networking Exception, a bank employee cannot receive “incentive compensation” unless such employee is an associated person of the broker-dealer. However, unregistered bank employees may receive referral compensation if such compensation is “a nominal one-time cash fee of a fixed dollar amount,” and (2) payment of the fee is not “contingent on whether the referral results in a transaction.” The proposed rules, some of the details of which follow, seek to (1) clarify ambiguity by defining certain of the cited terms, and (2) permit referral fees of more than a “nominal” amount where a bank employee refers an institutional or high net worth customer.
 
evince said:
go get your examples so we can talk about them individually

your party deregulates anything they can.

then we get fucked.


regulations are a tool


your fucks want the tool thrown in the trash.
Click to expand...

evince said:
this is not about me asshole


this is about FACTS


look at what was posted about it from the FACTS


it worked according to several studies huh asslick.


some times we need the TOOL of deregulation to fix things


some times we need the TOOL of regulation to fix things
Click to expand...

Desh LIES
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... I know each of the bills I cited you moron. You said YOU would discuss the bills. You LIED.

You simply cut and paste from Wiki. YOU LIED.
Click to expand...

then get discussing them asshole


were they all failed?


did some of them work?


I have been getting evidence placed here for a basis for the discussion.

you have been way busy trying to piss on my shoes instead of making any debate point huh cocklick
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... I know each of the bills I cited you moron. You said YOU would discuss the bills. You LIED.

You simply cut and paste from Wiki. YOU LIED.
Click to expand...

I have done more than post information


you have not posted anything that resembles a discussion of facts
 
evince said:
then get discussing them asshole


were they all failed?


did some of them work?


I have been getting evidence placed here for a basis for the discussion.

you have been way busy trying to piss on my shoes instead of making any debate point huh cocklick
Click to expand...

LMAO... what fucking 'evidence' you fucking moron? I posted the names of the bills. Any idiot, you proved this point, can go and look at wiki to find out the details of the bills.
 
evince said:
I have done more than post information


you have not posted anything that resembles a discussion of facts
Click to expand...

You have done more than post links and cut and paste jobs? You haven't discussed any details of any of the bills I listed. why is that Desh? Do you not understand them?
 
evince said:
this is not about me asshole


this is about FACTS


look at what was posted about it from the FACTS


it worked according to several studies huh asslick.


some times we need the TOOL of deregulation to fix things


some times we need the TOOL of regulation to fix things
Click to expand...

post 124
 
evince said:
you never answered
Click to expand...

First you show me where I stated any such thing. Oh, wait... I have never said we should have completely unregulated markets. Again DESH LIES.

AGAIN DESH TRIES TO AVOID ANSWERING WHETHER OR NOT THE DEREGULATION OF CARTER WAS GOOD OR BAD.

Why does Desh keep LYING dear readers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top