This comment thread originated in Secular Sexuality
in reference to legalized prostitution, but it has changed into a discussion about government regulation. For that reason, I don’t think it needs to stay in the sexuality group. If you are interested in commenting, then please visit Secular Sexuality and read the original comments
Below is my response to the last comment posted by AN member "Habman". His words are italicized. BTW, he is against gov regulation, and I am for it.
Yesterday you said: Regulation is what lead to the Wall Street melt down as people believed that someone else was looking out for their best interests.
So, if people believed that someone else was looking out for them, but they were not really looking out for them, then regulation was not really taking place, right? So how can it be the fault of regulation?
So then what is regulation? If 1000's of pages of law is not then is 2000, 5000, 10000, 100000? So what would you say is "real regulation"?
Regulation isn’t just about rules, or the number of pages in a legal document, it is about common sense oversight that protects people, institutions, and our shared resources.
And insiders will always be making the decisions. Is the Obama administration consulting you regarding what the new regulations for the banking industry should be? No they are being written by industry insiders who have bought and paid for them and the regulations will in the end benefit them and they companies.
Okay, I know I brought up industry insiders, but it is not necessarily a bad thing for them to be involved in regulation policy, as they are the ones with the know how about how an industry or sector works. You certainly don’t want biologists making economic policy. So the problem is not necessarily with insiders or those related to the field. The problem is when these insiders misuse the trust or power given to them in order to benefit a few corporations at the expense of the people.
Please name one thing that government does well. If they can't correctly regulate the banking industry after 200 years then how in the heck can they run the economy? And no the government is not an alien force it is much more insidious. It provides us with the appearance of freedom, but is actually the tool which the powerful and connected use to gain advantage over the unwashed masses, namely us.
They can’t correctly regulate the banking industry because of corruption and loopholes in existing so-called regulation. IMO, most regulation is only masquerading as regulation. One paragraph prohibits something, and the next provides a loophole to get around it. Lobbyists, corporations, and politicians see to that. It is a way of cheating the system, but that is a problem of ethics, and not one of regulation. Also, no, our freedom is not absolute, such as freedom of speech or gun rights, but I believe things like banking and credit industries that have too much power and influence are a bigger threat to freedom than government agencies. And yes, you are right, most laws and policies are, in one form or another, a “tool which the powerful and connected use to gain advantage over the unwashed masses, namely us.”
It is exactly the same thing just a different form. If you believe that the government has the right to regulate any non-violent activity you have given them power to regulate all non-violent activities and they will grab that power like a 4 year old grabs a lollipop.
The gov currently has the power to regulate non-violent activity, and yet we don’t live in a police state, as you are kind of suggesting. I don’t have to “show my papers” everywhere I go, and stuff like that.
All government is force plan and simple. Government is the measured application of violence again anything they deem unlawful.
Governments are a force, but not necessarily always bad. I hope you don’t think the US gov is as “forceful” as the Iranian gov. I’m not suggesting we’re always right, of course; that we don’t have many problems. Also, I am glad that some things are deemed unlawful, and that the government has the power of “measured application of violence again[st]” it—things like rape and murder.
I totally agree that they do, and that is why I oppose government in all its forms.
Your life is the basis of all your property and as such, it is you that should decide how it is used. Period. If you want to ingest a drug for what ever purpose, have at it. As long as you do not intrude on me or my property, you have that un-alienable right. Marriage is another example of usurpation by government.
I do not oppose gov in all forms, as you do. I think that is too extreme of an opinion. I agree, it is up to me to decide how my life is used, not the government’s; same for abortion rights, IMO. And yes, there are many ways in which the gov is too meddlesome. However, that sometimes comes about because of really bad behavior on the part of the citizens, like people dumping trash on the side of the streets. If people disposed of their trash properly, we wouldn’t need laws to regulate and punish behavior, and TX wouldn’t spend something like 11 million per annum to clean up our highways.
Marriage was historically a function of the church with no state involvement. Slowly the government transformed it from a religious rite to a state license.
Thank goodness for that, or else the church would control it still, and divorce and interracial marriage would be “illegal”.
As it currently stands industry can dump toxins poisoning and killing people downstream and as long as they stay under the government regulatory maximums those injured are powerless to do anything about it. They cannot sue for damages because the industry was "operating within the allowable limits". And if the government fines them for dumping the injured parties again get nothing it is the government that benefits.
This is so very true. I agree with you completely. But the fault here is regulation that is too soft, with too many loopholes, that does not punish corporations for hurting citizens, or hold them accountable. Can you honestly suggest that LESS REGULATION would be better, because then the corporations will simply do the right thing out of the goodness of their hearts?
Another perfect example. Exactly how does any regulation in the books protect you when you get your taxes done? What actually protects you is the accountant wanting to stay in business. Government regulations in no way insure that the accountant is competent, intelligent or honest. What they actually do is drive up the cost of having your taxes done but limiting the number of accountants available.
It protects me by giving me some assurance that these people are adhering to some standard of training, are proving themselves (through cont. ed testing) competent and able to do their job, that they understand IRS rules, and that they didn’t get their degree from the Copa Cabana School of Accounting. It also gives me a way to seek recourse if they fail to do their job, and to hopefully hold them accountable (that is if lobbyists haven’t weaseled in too many loopholes and corporate protectionism clauses).
Predatory businesses don’t care about doing the right thing. They care about exploiting people, so while an honest person may not need regulation, the crook is certainly not going to protect me just because he wants to stay in business.
Just as medical schools where implemented by doctors to limit the number of doctors practicing by limiting the number that are allowed to graduate.
That is the craziest thing I’ve ever heard. Medical schools were implemented to teach people how to become doctors. It is a pretty hard degree to get, I believe. Certainly harder than the one I got.
Again another example that proves my point. Doctors mistakes kill more people each year that guns, cars, planes and drowning. But we don't see a movement to ban doctors and what where does regulation protect the patient from bad doctors?
Doctor’s don’t kill people. Disease kills people. Doctor’s make mistakes because medicine is not an exact science, diseases mutate or are incurable, and sometimes patients don’t do what they are told or follow RX instructions, etc. No doctor is perfect, they are human, but I can forgive a competent MD who makes a human mistake before I can forgive an incompetent MD who doesn’t give a shit.
In fact every instance you've brought up is handled just fine under civil or criminal law.
Civil and criminal law is a form of regulation and a form of government exerting control over the unwashed masses. I thought you were against all forms of gov, so how can you use that statement? You said: I oppose government in all its forms…
Punished for overly selfish or anti-social ways? Was anyone punished in the banking collapse? How about AIG?
No they were not. They got away with it, and it was wrong. And I’m angry over it. But that didn’t happen because of regulation; that happened because of cronyism, corrupt or weak politicians, and the influence of money in Washington.
No! In both cases in fact some of them received huge freaking bonuses paid for with the fruits of my and your labors in the form of tax dollars for doing so!! This is the product of government regulation.
First sentence is true. Second is not.
But an investment broker with 30 minutes and a pencil figured it out and contacted the SEC, explained the fraud and what did they do about it? They ignored it! Why because Bernie was connected, hell he ran the NYSE. Just proves my point once again.
True, but that does not prove that regulation is wrong. It proves that corruption and a lack of ethics exists where it should not. Not that regulation is inherently a bad idea.
Fraud is already as illegal as it can be, so why in the world would we need another level of laws to protect against it? Regulations of any industry are put in place to allow cover for certain companies at the expense of others.
This is also true, but again, this is not true oversight and regulation. This is corporate welfare masquerading as regulation. It’s just a lie.
Take the NAFTA "free trade" agreement, 12,000 pages of regulation to define "free trade". I can define it in one paragraph, but want it actually did was protect certain companies from having to trade freely in an open and fair marketplace.
Don’t know much about NAFTA, but I tend to think you are right. It also gave us an unfair advantage over the little guy in 3rd world markets because we subsized (corporate welfare) many US businesses, like agribusiness, and they can’t compete with that.
I find it amazing that only when it comes to government are people willing to throw more and more money into a organization that fails time and again.
Would you take your car back into a repair shop that when returned to pick it up after an oil change found that the wheels were missing and then told you that if you just paid them more to begin with it would have never happened? I bet not, so why do you buy into the idea that if we just give them more they will be less corrupt?
So what you are suggesting is that our government run by US citizens is highly flawed and corrupt, but private corporations, run by US citizens, and allowed to do business without regulation would do a better job? That they would not be flawed and corrupt, but would do the right thing, act with honesty, fairness, and integrity out of the goodness of their heart? And that regulation is just holding them back from being the decent, fair-minded citizens they long to be? To me, it sounds like that that is what you are suggesting. The same people that run corporations are often the same ppl in gov, but at least in government people have some sway over who gets elected, who can run for an office, and stuff like that. People have none of that control over corporations.
I’m not saying our gov is perfect, but I still think real, enforceable, honest regulation is better than false regulation or no regulation at all.
So just extend this to the sex trade and you will have just one more mess. The reason that they keep the sex trade illegal is it produces millions in fines and fees that feed the government system with it's prisons, police, judicial and legal systems.
Perhaps so, just as they keep cigarettes legal. It may cause health problems, but it sure does bring in a lot of income in the form of tax dollars -- tax dollars you can count on, cuz it is kind of like, IDK, addictive.
Government creates imagined boogie men to justify its existence, and it is time we see through it.
True, just like republicans do with homosexuals. We're the boogie man whose gonna destroy all those decent, faithful, happy heterosexual marriages. But corporations do this same thing through marketing and consumer pressures, but that is another discussion.