Church - A place for quiet reflection ...

[flacaltenn]

NoOneReal:

Quote:
Originally Posted by flacaltenn
Corporations don't retain armies of lawyers and lobbyists because they WANT to. They do it because they HAVE TO.

Hog wash.

They do it to ensure they are free of prison when they make decisions that are immoral and unethical.

If you've been damaged --- SUE!!!! There are armies of lawyers taking 100s of Wall Street firms to court EVERY DAY... Unfortunately, you don't hear much about the results because the lawyers suck off so much of the settlements. But I get 3 or 4 notices a month that I've been damaged and if I want to fill out 12 pages of litigation paper, I can recover 7 cents a share...

See -- im the little guy, so when a bond company gets dinged for 128 Million dollars, my damages are in the order of $2.20. I've truly got more financial crisis to solve than that.

[JonL]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

JonL:

You do realize don't you, that a mere 40 years ago, high schools sponsored rifle teams for target shooting on a fairly routine basis. Could have had an incident, but I don't remember any facts relating to high schoolers skirmishing with their school issued match rifles.. Why do you think that was?

Neither of us know if there were incidents or not, nor do I see how the controlled use of what were probably bolt action .22 caliber rifles in a target shooting sporting event is even remotely relevant to the situation of unstable people being able to carry arsenals of high capacity automatic weapons around the streets and campuses of our society.

I'll answer your question directly.. NO ONE is trusted by me enough to own nukes. Not Obama, not Amadinajob. So those are off the table. I don't need anything swifter than a semi-auto rifle or a handgun in my personal gun locker. HOWEVER -- I'd like to be able to go somewhere and RENT a howitzer for the afternoon. Or maybe actually get a certificate to operate an Abrams Battle Tank during my summer trip to Arizona.

So, as an "eco-whack" here, I guess it would be fair to describe you as a "gun nut" who just gets their rocks off by making a big noise and blowing something up with a rented howitzer. Strikes me as being more of an unresolved issue regarding feelings of impotence and inadequacy (possibly stemming from childhood), rather than any real concern about "freedom." Thanks for being honest. I'd have no problem with setting up areas where all the psychos and gun nuts can go and rent all the destructive power they want to play GI Joe for the afternoon. Go, have at it, get it out of your system. It'll probably make the world a safer place.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

MerryLander (and I hope things are good there)



I probably had the proper tickets, so holster it...

In the case of Apollo, we don't get the spin that Grumman, Hughes, Lockheed and GE got us to the moon now do we?

Ever watch the old clips of people making preparations for the Apollo missions? Corporate logos are everywhere. Rockwell, Lockheed, etc., etc.............
Yes, private corporations did the actual building of hardware, of course they did. And, I don't see that anyone tried to hide that fact. If you didn't notice it, you weren't paying attention.

Dave

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

Ever watch the old clips of people making preparations for the Apollo missions? Corporate logos are everywhere. Rockwell, Lockheed, etc., etc.............
Yes, private corporations did the actual building of hardware, of course they did. And, I don't see that anyone tried to hide that fact. If you didn't notice it, you weren't paying attention.

Dave

plus one

but it took government to do it

big expensive government

government that saw the bigger picture

[piece-itpete]

It appears Obama didn't see that particular photo album

Legal vs illegal makes a huge damned difference. I can go to say Chicago and buy a gun illegally, and shot a law abiding citizen with it who I know darn well is unarmed.

Pete

[flacaltenn]

JonL:

But without federal regulation, there wouldn't even be minimum standards. The federal turkey regulations don't allow corporations to sell adulterated, modified meat as "pure turkey," they restrict the level of adulteration the corporations can include. Without minimum standards, what would "Turkey" be like? Who knows. There would certainly be unscrupulous companies foisting horrible things on the public as "Turkey." Without regulation there would be no need for them to disclose what's inside. The minimum standard is (or should be) intended to ensure that the least common denominator is still safe and that the consumer knows what they are getting. Companies like Hebrew National are still free to exceed that standard. There is still market choice in action. If the regulations and standards are poorly written, they should be improved, and not with the undue influence of the industry.

Hate to be a rigorous bore here but your 2nd sentence contradicts itself logically. The truth is federal standards ALLOW the sale of mystery meat and adulteration (not to mention purposefully blurring the concepts of frozen, organic, or natural). Ask any Organic frantic person whether they trust the FEDERAL definition of organic or if they have a 3rd party private certification that they trust more.

Do you trust Underwriters' Labs? Do you trust Consumer Reports? These are all valid alternatives to questionable govt standards that ARE potentially juggled by industry..

And here's the rub. The Feds are NOT experts on every aspect of our daily lives. In fact, I don't want legislation on turkey written without input from the 1000s of experts out there providing the product everyday. So when you say "without undue influence from industry" -- it's trickier than you might think.. Do you really want an energy policy written without input from the big producers? If you do-- we need to live in separate countries..

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

MerryLander (and I hope things are good there)



I probably had the proper tickets, so holster it...

Those Savannah, Hanford, Snake river pollution sites were on FED land, under FED oversight, using FED dollars. The fact that the govt uses private contractors for anything productive doesn't let them skate responsibility now does it? In the case of Apollo, we don't get the spin that Grumman, Hughes, Lockheed and GE got us to the moon now do we?

The FED govt is one of (if not THE) most dangerous polluters in this country.

She is fine, they call every so often to see if she is still alive. This was a big private corporation in Ohio who handled radio-active materials as if they thought it was talcum powder.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

JonL:



Hate to be a rigorous bore here but your 2nd sentence contradicts itself logically. The truth is federal standards ALLOW the sale of mystery meat and adulteration (not to mention purposefully blurring the concepts of frozen, organic, or natural). Ask any Organic frantic person whether they trust the FEDERAL definition of organic or if they have a 3rd party private certification that they trust more.

Do you trust Underwriters' Labs? Do you trust Consumer Reports? These are all valid alternatives to questionable govt standards that ARE potentially juggled by industry..

And here's the rub. The Feds are NOT experts on every aspect of our daily lives. In fact, I don't want legislation on turkey written without input from the 1000s of experts out there providing the product everyday. So when you say "without undue influence from industry" -- it's trickier than you might think.. Do you really want an energy policy written without input from the big producers? If you do-- we need to live in separate countries..

Perhaps you would rather have your turkey produced, warehoused and delivered to you in the cheapest possible manner? And, no, I don't trust UL or Consumer Reports anymore than I trust government regulators. Are they really any less corruptible? You may think so, but I don't.

I happen to work in the food industry, BTW. So be careful of the claims you make regarding food safety.

Dave

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

The gun ownership to crime info would be more useful if it had LEGAL ownership to LEGALLY owned gun crime. I can go buy a illegal gun right now.

I read not that long ago that 50% of businesses in China are owned by the Chinese military.

Pete

You do realize that Congress has told BATF that they are not allowed to keep records of where guns used in the commision of crimes were obtained.

China Govt = Chinese Army = a lot of Chinese coproration.

[JonL]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

JonL:



Hate to be a rigorous bore here but your 2nd sentence contradicts itself logically. The truth is federal standards ALLOW the sale of mystery meat and adulteration (not to mention purposefully blurring the concepts of frozen, organic, or natural). Ask any Organic frantic person whether they trust the FEDERAL definition of organic or if they have a 3rd party private certification that they trust more.

Do you trust Underwriters' Labs? Do you trust Consumer Reports? These are all valid alternatives to questionable govt standards that ARE potentially juggled by industry..

And here's the rub. The Feds are NOT experts on every aspect of our daily lives. In fact, I don't want legislation on turkey written without input from the 1000s of experts out there providing the product everyday. So when you say "without undue influence from industry" -- it's trickier than you might think.. Do you really want an energy policy written without input from the big producers? If you do-- we need to live in separate countries..

Maybe my syntax was confusing. I'll try to clarify... without regulation, companies are free to do whatever they damn well please. They could slap a "Turkey" label on anything at all, turkey or not. If they were concerned about lawsuits, they'd put in the bare minimum amount of a turkey product that they thought would optimize their profits balanced by the lawsuits they might lose.

The regulations RESTRICT the amount of adulteration. Maybe not as much as you or I would like, but without the regulations there would be NO control whatsoever.

I'd love to see better written regulations that are more protective of consumer rights than they are of industry profits, and that's a good reason to restrict corporate power over the government. In no way does that mean that organizations such as UL, consumer reports, etc. aren't very valuable as well.

I agree that industry should be consulted in drafting regulations, and that was one of the things that impressed me about the way the EPA went about their regulatory process. I said regulations should be written without UNDUE influence, meaning that the more powerful corporations shouldn't be able to create a self-serving, non-level playing field, nor should the powerful corporations' influence subvert the reasons for the regulations in the first place, which should be to protect the common good and not simply the corporations' interests.