Do you approve of the SEC, the FCC, the NLRB, and the 8-hour work week?

Feb 2018
3,150
2,359
Oregon
Reluctantly yes, but only because government created the conditions under which child labor was so odious.
How did government create the conditions? What were those conditions?

Given that I believe, rightly or wrong, abolishing child labor is a government "solution" to a government created problem, yes I approve (of the abolition of child labor - ed).
You can thank FDR, the socialist, like Bernie.


Eliminate the FDIC and all bank bailouts and poor banking practices will lead to failure, thus discouraging them.
...and bankrupt most people who keep significant portions of their savings in banks.

Without government banking bailouts, nearly all banking would be local, because a large bank really would be too big to fail because of the devastation it would cause so only the super-rich would own or do business with them.
The FDIC insures depositors against loss in bank failures. There is no authority for "bailouts" involved.


Those (paid vacations -ed.) are not government mandated. As a self-employed person, I don't have them. If you think that is wrong, I'll start a gofundme account and you can be the first to contribute.
They are not universal. - Vacation Leave | U.S. Department of Labor
 
Feb 2020
1,645
597
Houston
How did government create the conditions? What were those conditions?
It's too long to tell in a couple of sentences.

You asked if I approve of child labor laws and I do.

You can thank FDR, the socialist, like Bernie.
Yeah, thanks.

...and bankrupt most people who keep significant portions of their savings in banks.
Right so people will be more careful about who they pick to manage their money. They'd certainly spread it around instead of keeping all their nest eggs in one basket sitting too close to the edge of the counter.

The FDIC insures depositors against loss in bank failures. There is no authority for "bailouts" involved.
The government is motivated to bail out banks by their assumed obligation to pay off depositors. That's what "too big to fail" means.

Neither is paid sick leave.

Are you going to contribute are not?
 
Feb 2018
3,150
2,359
Oregon
It's too long to tell in a couple of sentences.

You asked if I approve of child labor laws and I do.
Yeahright. The government's only role in creating child labor was in failing to prevent it until FDR.

Right so people will be more careful about who they pick to manage their money. They'd certainly spread it around instead of keeping all their nest eggs in one basket sitting too close to the edge of the counter.
How do you know that would be true?

The government is motivated to bail out banks by their assumed obligation to pay off depositors. That's what "too big to fail" means.
The FDIC isn't "government". The FDIC and its reserves are not funded by public funds. Member banks' insurance dues are the FDIC's primary source of funding.

Are you going to contribute are not?
I just did. You'll be contacted about it in a day or two.
 
Jul 2014
16,447
10,822
massachusetts
If you look at the history of "nanny state laws" they are always passed in response to some horrible tragedy brought about by the "Free Market System". We have the FDA, because there is a lot of profit in selling bottles of poison as "medicine for children". We have child labor laws because hiring little children to do dangerous jobs is more profitable than hiring adults.
The fact is that every "pure play" has problems, you get cult members who back "Pure Free Market", "Pure Socialism", "Pure Communism", but none of that shit works very well.
What works is a pragmatic combination, and it has to change to keep up with the people gaming the system.
In the bible they had a kind of free market that worked like a monopoly game, every 49 years, they'd divide everything up equally and go from there, you could win or lose after that, but 49 years later everyone got equalized, all debts forgiven, all property divided equally, and take it from there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lloyd Christmas
Feb 2018
3,150
2,359
Oregon
If you look at the history of "nanny state laws" they are always passed in response to some horrible tragedy brought about by the "Free Market System". We have the FDA, because there is a lot of profit in selling bottles of poison as "medicine for children". We have child labor laws because hiring little children to do dangerous jobs is more profitable than hiring adults.
The fact is that every "pure play" has problems, you get cult members who back "Pure Free Market", "Pure Socialism", "Pure Communism", but none of that shit works very well.
What works is a pragmatic combination, and it has to change to keep up with the people gaming the system.
In the bible they had a kind of free market that worked like a monopoly game, every 49 years, they'd divide everything up equally and go from there, you could win or lose after that, but 49 years later everyone got equalized, all debts forgiven, all property divided equally, and take it from there.
Yes, the important thing is to strive for the ideal and improve and enhance according to need. But keeping the ideal as a goal is essential. China and Russia attempted to establish socialism but made adjustments willy-nilly without insisting on keeping the goal, and we've all seen the results.
 
Jul 2014
16,447
10,822
massachusetts
Yes, the important thing is to strive for the ideal and improve and enhance according to need. But keeping the ideal as a goal is essential. China and Russia attempted to establish socialism but made adjustments willy-nilly without insisting on keeping the goal, and we've all seen the results.
The important thing to remember is that the economic system is a game we play to produce goods and services and to divide them up. There's the important activity, farming, manufacturing, mining, and there's the game activity, finance and banking.
But don't forget, the important thing is producing and distributing the stuff we need, the game isn't as important.
But we are allocating too much to the game, that has to change.
In a Monopoly Game (Parker Brothers), when someone owns most of the property, the game is over, we put the money and the deeds back in the bank, everyone gets $1500, and we start over.
We are getting to the point where we need to pick up the cards reshuffle the deck and deal a new hand.
We can do that gradually or all at once, we do it gradually by raising taxes on the wealthy, and providing benefits to the lower and middle class to the point where we can mitigate the effects of skewed wealth distribution.
Or we can do it all at once, in a bloody revolution.
Right now we are just making it worse, but "events happen" and there are events happening now that could precipitate great change, we'll see how that turns out.