Live and let live

[Tubetec]

A friend sent me this short clip link ,
I might as well just not comment myself and just say I agree with the guy .
Some interesting comments if you scroll down too .
It reminds me of an episode of Little house on the Prarie or the Waltons ,(cant remember which ), where big government steps in and takes peoples land away to build a dam .

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Next they'll be after your local roadside produce stands or neighbors trading/sharing what food they've grown. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

 

[Tubetec]

Is greed the price we have to pay for this so called liberty?

 

[fazer]

Like he said in the video, the Inspection agency gets bribed to look the other way when it comes to the 4 big meat packer monopolies in the US. So to make it look like they are doing their job, they go after the Amish. Makes it look like they are doing their job. Easy to prosecute in court a sacrificial lamb.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Is greed the price we have to pay for this so called liberty?

I could argue that you traded your freedom when you* "allowed" the government to insert itself into your food chain. Or when you* started buying mass-produced food from unknown sources (i.e., not someone in your community who can be trusted and who would be shunned for purposeful deceit or cheating) and therefore needed "inspections" in the first place.

*by "you" I really mean "we" as so-called modern humans living in advanced societies (as opposed to actual communities like we did up until 100-150 years ago).

 

[Recording Engineer]

Oh, I wish it was all as simplistic as people try to make it out to be, usually for political purpose… Would make the solutions so much easier and harder to fight against.

 

[rob_gould]

I find it genuinely fascinating how many Americans feel that government regulation is more of an issue in their lives than corporate greed made possible by deregulation.

He complains about the shitty quality of food produced by large corporations (a fair and accurate complaint) and then in the same breath complains about overbearing government regulation.

Which one is it? Which one is responsible for low quality food produced and sold for immense profit by large corporations? Is it lack of regulation? Or is it too much regulation? Is the root cause of crappy, processed or otherwise low quality food in supermarkets really *too much* government regulation?

Would this chap be happy with a complete removal of all regulation from all food producers nationwide? I wonder if he's considered how that would affect the people who live in cities and are unable to buy their produce direct from the producer? My suspicion is that less regulation would make food quality worse for people who rely on supermarkets to eat.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

It really is that simple. Large "advanced" civilization tramples on individual liberty and independence. Our government's primary purpose was to protect our individual liberties from threats, both external and internal to the USA. Instead it has grown too large and is now corrupted by the very forces it should be defending against, including corporations.

 

[rob_gould]

So what is the right size?

Army?
Police?
Tax authority?
Education?

Should none of these be centrally administered? Are you willing to acknowledge any benefits at all from these things being funded and administrated centrally?

To continue with our example in this thread, I'm quite sure I could scratch around and find an example of poorly imported or corrupted food regulation in Europe. But if you asked, on balance, whether food regulation has a net positive effect or net negative effect on my life, and the lives of 99.99% of citizens, I would undoubtedly say that it is net positive. If the alternative is to 'leave it to the markets to decide' what the safe levels of pesticides are in my food, or what conditions animals should be kept in before they're slaughtered, the quality of the food that's available to most people will undoubtedly suffer.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I find it genuinely fascinating how many Americans feel that government regulation is more of an issue in their lives than corporate greed made possible by deregulation.

IMO most american voters are focussed on issues like, inflation, crime, abortion, etc. Many voters don't correlate energy price increases with regulatory clamp downs on the energy industry, if they did it would be a bigger issue, but they feel the prices.

He complains about the shitty quality of food produced by large corporations (a fair and accurate complaint) and then in the same breath complains about overbearing government regulation.

it sounds like you are singling out one member for your criticism. Government regulation does not insure high food quality, at best they can regulate food safety.

Why tractor-riding Dutch farmers are protesting in the Netherlands​

Jul 7, 2022The new regulations say they want a 50% cut of nitrogen oxide and ammonia emissions nationwide by 2030. ... Dutch farmers angry at government plans to slash emissions also used tractors and trucks Monday to blockade supermarket distribution centers, the latest actions in a summer of discontent in the country's lucrative agricultural sector.

Which one is it? Which one is responsible for low quality food produced and sold for immense profit by large corporations? Is it lack of regulation? Or is it too much regulation? Is the root cause of crappy, processed or otherwise low quality food in supermarkets really *too much* government regulation?

I blame the consumers who buy the crap food. If they didn't buy it the food industry would not make it.

Would this chap be happy with a complete removal of all regulation from all food producers nationwide? I wonder if he's considered how that would affect the people who live in cities and are unable to buy their produce direct from the producer? My suspicion is that less regulation would make food quality worse for people who rely on supermarkets to eat.

Weak straw man argument.

I have long conceded that there is a place for "some" government regulation to moderate unfettered capitalism. Crony capitalism is a real risk when big business partners with big government to serve each other, not the public good.

I find it fascinating how poorly many outsiders value our judgement, from a distance. I suspect their media habitually runs down America to make them feel better about themselves. But this is speculation on my part since I avoid*** their media when possible.

JR

**** Years ago I used to watch rebroadcasts of regional news from the middle east to get a useful perspective on events there. That program has since lost funding.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

So what is the right size?

Much smaller than our currently bloated Federal Government. Start there. Reform and simplify tax law and drastically cut the IRS. We have far too many overlapping security/spy agencies with their overhead and "need to justify their budgets" attitudes. Reduce, consolidate, eliminate some of them. Same with the "health" agencies. How much is really needed? How much of our current "oversight" is really just captured by big pharma, health insurers, etc?

Army?

We can adequately fund our military.

Police?

Necessary, but reduce expenditures on "tactical" vehicles and gear, emphasize training.

Tax authority?

See above.

Education?

Necessary, but there is far too much emphasis on standardized testing and "free" college or government loan programs. An honest, pragmatic post-mortem of the the last few decades of policy and outcomes should reveal what needs to be eliminated or drastically reformed. Teaching children to think logically and to be skeptical is what will protect them from A) their own government and B) predatory corporations (advertising, etc,). Unfortunately we're more focused on immutable external characteristics, gender, and not hurting anyone's feelings instead of actual education.

Should none of these be centrally administered? Are you willing to acknowledge any benefits at all from these things being funded and administrated centrally?

It's all about trade-offs. When the policies/agencies cost more (in dollars and liberty) than the benefits they provide they need to go. There's nothing more permanent than a temporary government program, unfortunately.

To continue with our example in this thread, I'm quite sure I could scratch around and find an example of poorly imported or corrupted food regulation in Europe. But if you asked, on balance, whether food regulation has a net positive effect or net negative effect on my life, and the lives of 99.99% of citizens, I would undoubtedly say that it is net positive. If the alternative is to 'leave it to the markets to decide' what the safe levels of pesticides are in my food, or what conditions animals should be kept in before they're slaughtered, the quality of the food that's available to most people will undoubtedly suffer.

I agree that some level of regulation is needed. But when the regulatory agencies/government allow the removal of country of origin from food labels, removal of GMO labeling, and the selling of huge farm and agribusiness to overseas entities, there is something fundamentally broken (regulatory capture). And then the focus shifts to the Amish or other producers who have no budget for legal defense and no lobbying power. I hope you'd agree that this is fundamentally broken. Spending more money trying to patch it up isn't going to work, nor is leaving it alone.

And yes, a good part of it goes back to the Citizens United decision which is a big problem that needs to be addressed. Corporations are not people and do not have rights like people do.

 

[rob_gould]

Interesting, thanks. This deserves a reply later when I'm laptopping instead of hasty phone typing.

For the record, I appreciate that you don't deflect questions or take my questions as personal criticisms, despite some fairly fundamental differences of opinion between us. It's an interesting insight into a different mindset

 

[JohnRoberts]

So what is the right size?

Army?

Military needs more funding our weakened military readiness just encourages bad actors to act badly.

Police?

Police have been compromised by catch and release no-bail laws, and DAs/Judges that don't enforce existing laws. Some regions are having trouble maintaining adequate police staffing due to resignations. It is hard for police to see perps released back to the streets within hours of arrest. IL is set to eliminate cash bail in 2023, so the streets of Chicago will get even more dangerous, next year, than they already are.

Tax authority?

85k new tax collectors ,,, Maybe we can move them to our Southern border to collect taxes from the cartels drug trafficking and human smuggling.

Education?

A classic case of government worker unions corrupting the process. Education is too important to leave to teacher's unions.

Should none of these be centrally administered? Are you willing to acknowledge any benefits at all from these things being funded and administrated centrally?

It is a matter of degree... The Chinese PRC is the poster boy for central management. Local government is always more responsive to public needs than federal government.

To continue with our example in this thread, I'm quite sure I could scratch around and find an example of poorly imported or corrupted food regulation in Europe. But if you asked, on balance, whether food regulation has a net positive effect or net negative effect on my life, and the lives of 99.99% of citizens, I would undoubtedly say that it is net positive. If the alternative is to 'leave it to the markets to decide' what the safe levels of pesticides are in my food, or what conditions animals should be kept in before they're slaughtered, the quality of the food that's available to most people will undoubtedly suffer.

Food safety is primary basis for government food regulation, not food quality (whatever that is) as previously argued.

Markets will generally push back against bad industry practices when customers are informed.

JR

 

[Matador]

I find it genuinely fascinating how many Americans feel that government regulation is more of an issue in their lives than corporate greed made possible by deregulation.

More government is never the answer except in all the cases where it is. And the free market will step in to fix everything except when it doesn't. That's America in a nutshell.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

More government is never the answer except in all the cases where it is. And the free market will step in to fix everything except when it doesn't. That's America in a nutshell.

More government is rarely the answer to any problem. Regulation of some corporate activities and breaking monopolies are two examples where government intervention is needed. There are others, but your ideological hack viewpoint won't allow you to see clearly.

 

[JohnRoberts]

More government is never the answer except in all the cases where it is. And the free market will step in to fix everything except when it doesn't. That's America in a nutshell.

Hard to tell if this is joking.... that's why we use emoticons.

We could probably use a little more government regulation of cryptocurrencies (some cryptos like stable coins are not fully audited to confirm that they have assets to back the currency peg. The feds have been making progress regarding capturing high speed trading information. I still don't trust payment for order flow as being good for markets/customers (its good for somebody).

It is a common logical trap in political discussions to argue all or nothing. Life is rarely that binary.

JR

 

[Matador]

#rule4

 

[JohnRoberts]

#rule4

4. You will find that the members of this community are courteous and respectful of each other, so please reciprocate those gestures. Leave the flame-war mentality at another forum. Personal attacks and generally hateful comments (regarding race, religion, gender, sex, etc...) will not be tolerated.

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Can we add a rule prohibiting passive-aggressive trolling, whining to moderators about anything that "hurts my feelings," and aggressive looking avatars? Asking for a friend.

 

[shabtek]

can someone separate the corporations from the policy makers? seems to me very blurry, why can't we grok this reality