Another Failure of Republican Deregulation

Amazing that 'capitalism' wont work when its what made us what we are and the envy of the world. For over 200 years it worked very well.

Go ahead and blame it on the regulations or lax thereof:
There is no perfect form of economy which can eliminate the greed factor. Every form of economy there is has had its cycles of prosperity and failure. In each kind, there are those who manipulate what they have to gain control over what they don't have.... and manipulate access vs demand to drive a profit. When you have more businesses competing, both the markets, the consumers, the workers, and the profiteers benefit. The real regulations which have been loss are those which prevented monopolies to form .....of industry types, of capital, of resources both natural and developed. However, it only takes a few giants to become strong enough to manipulate laws in their favor by lobbying...... and to manipulate consumers by various fronts to drive away their competition.

No matter what the form of government or economy, there will always be some people who are after wealth, power, and control, who have no real interest or investment in others or their welfare. This can also be true of governments...... who are only as good as the people who rule. And the people who rule can only be as good as the people who vote them into office require that they be.

(I enjoyed 'Camelot' by the way. Fond memories of courtship and engagement to my 1st husband!)

It is true 'might doesn't make right' ....... but 'might' can mean strength of any kind. The strength we enjoyed in our economy and our form of government is that, for the first 150 or so years...... the people were largely in control of government and exercised their liberties amid a wide range of moral conscience..... which was generally more unified than split. A healthy skepticism of government prevented excesses of intrusion into private and public affairs, including business. The freedom of the pen, of print, of speach, of movement, would spread the word to stifle the influence of those charlatans, who might benefit for a while. It didn't mean everything was always fair.... but it worked to give the power and strength to the people to make government accountable.

I don't understand the meaning of the phrase 'the magic hand'.

The inspection of airplanes in a way is similar to the practice of a profession. At the turn of the 20th century, almost anyone could hang a shingle and be called a dentist or a doctor. It didn't mean they had to be good..... but, unless they were the only one around, people went to those who helped them get relief, and didn't go to the ones who didn't. But now, it is the government that regulates the practice: One might qualify by education, knowledge, and skills, but without a current license, he's not allowed to even give his service away for free. This was never heard of in 1900.

To this day, some people.....like the Amish......practice extrordinary skills of workmanship and building ....enough to put most anyone to shame....... homes that stand decades of storms........ but let them try to build a home with their own hands, their own money, on their own land, for only their own loved ones to live............. and that without a permit............ and their up and beyond their necks in governmental regulations and do-do and fines for not getting and paying for the proper approval. I dare say, our forefathers would have understood the need for driver testing and some kind of certificate showing one understood the rules of the road..... but would have never agreed to having to carry papers of identification for movement within a free country....... nor a paper which required renewal for the privilege of movement: They would have understood fines for violations.

As for bridges and their inspections: It can hardly be an argument against requiring inspection of something which the government builds, with the public funds, for the purpose of the public good and transportation. This is sort of strange to place with the airplanes....which is commercially funded, but the use involves the safety of lives and the trust of consumers, and the investment of public funds to help provide and enforce the rules of the sky as well as the airports and runways. But these kind of regulations.... for the practice of medicine, the building of structures, the safety of airplanes are not intended to interfer with the commerce nor to totally eliminate risks and liability accepted by consumers choice.

Totally agree with this statement provided that freedom begins at home..:thumbs:


But none of this comes under the doings of control by a political party, which can neither make laws nor enforce them.

 

Is that it?

You base a thread on a false statement, avoid valid questions like

__________________

and then....

just change the subject?

You are being intellectually dishonest.

 

No, it doesn't, and you're avoiding the question.

It's easy to understand why. You don't have an honest answer to support your premise.

 

Sometimes it appears you don't think at all.

You still have furnished no support for your premise.