Deregulation

**rv2pc3d** · 10-16-08, 04:11 PM

It doesn't.... it's the PEOPLE taking advantage of the situation who are.

Plain and simple.

**Red_Lizard2** · 10-16-08, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by CivilWars

I could be wrong, but I don't believe we are speaking about the same forms of deregulation. I am not supporting anarchy or terrorism, and I don't think any of the politicians are either.

No your reading what i am saying wrong. i am saying i don't mind having 4-5 energy companies in my area competing for my business. I'm saying though because its part of the major infrastructure i want background checks before they start up a company, just make sure they are on the up and up and not have bad motives.

Best way i can put it is an example with the iraqi army. If we are giving modern technology to their army, we want to make sure one of the people in the army did not join just to steal our equipment and use it against us.

**SonicDogfart** · 10-16-08, 07:14 PM

Originally Posted by ebaconjr

Can you imagine anyone deregulating to the point that they would allow traditional criminal behavior? I can't.

Buy electricity from me or I blow up your house! Silly. Not even the most hard-line deregulationist would take it that far. He wouldn't even take it to the point of allowing price fixing.

The differences between regulation and deregulation are much more subtle, however the long term effects are very real. That's why neither one is the right medicine for every situation.

Silly indeed, however...control of infrastructure is an even better tool for social control than guns. EX: China. When Bejing wants/needs to they shut down the internet, electricity, phone, etc. Guns are messy and leave hard feelings that span generations. Even lead to full blown revolutions. Nobody takes a picture of a blank web browser. My employer has a manufacturing faciltiy in China...I hear things. And sometimes, I don't and it's not because a truck just skidded off the road and hit a power pole.

**MotoZ** · 10-16-08, 09:38 PM

Originally Posted by SonicDogfart

control of infrastructure is an even better tool for social control than guns.

Bingo.

**SonicDogfart** · 10-17-08, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Originally Posted by ebaconjr

I don't blame the party. I blame deregulation. It just happens to be pushed by Republicans.

Then why didn't the most powerful man in the world veto it to? Even if Congress pushed it through without him it would show the Democratic disdain. I blame politicians.

It's really quite simple...Imagine a D (up for re-election or challenging an R or vice versa) at the front of a minority (pick your flavor) congregation and asking, " by a show of hands, how many of you are out of that run down rental or government subsidized housing project...and in a home you own?" When the hands go up, the person/politician points to the CRA and takes credit for supporting it. Both sides are doing it because of fierce competiton for those votes. Which goes back to my original point if you care to review it. Maggie Thatcher's famous quip of " Win the argument then win the election" holds true. The R's lost the arguement about redlining in the early 90's and the D's surfed their intestines with it. Bill Clinton understood this long ago and has been using it to wax his surfboard ever since. The reason this understandably befuddles you is that you've probably never spent any time on the campaign trail. Few have...you're in the majority. But hosed, all the same. What the politicians (either stripe) understand is that you don't have the energy or wherewithall to get down in the ditch with them.