Page 120 of 149 FirstFirst ... 2070110118119120121122130 ... LastLast
Results 1,191 to 1,200 of 1482

Thread: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

  1. #1191
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,244

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I have no trouble with Cato, as bias is seldom my problem. Inaccuracy is. However, they state clear that some may argue 43 cases might be the exception. And they are right about that. What they give as evidence is largely circumstancial, and not objectively certain. At best, I think it raises the question. Some of their perscriptive messures I would not object to, like independent oversight and review. I have no problem tightening up the program. But what I need as far as to the claim that it is pervasive is some actual studies of large numbers of cases that gives us some % of abuse.
    Hard to say those studies exist, given the data belongs to the state and I am not sure how accessible it is to researchers. But pretending for a moment these studies do exist, what percentage of false/questionable claims would convince you the program is wrought with fraud vulnerability?

    Chances are it's all going to be subjective anyway. Let's say a bricklayer becomes physically damaged and never gathered skills to be anything other than a bricklayer, but has nothing wrong with his speech or mental functioning. Is he disabled? From being a bricklayer, yeah. But from a variety of other jobs he could apply himself toward and strive for? Each case is unique and I'm betting a majority of disabled folks (assuming the disability is not due to psychosis or developmental disability/retardation/etc.) theoretically could strive toward other work but feel hopeless about their prospects, and so they hop around from doctor's office to doctor's office seeking endorsement to be on disability. This is all subjective and case-by-case, and I'm not going to make appeals to my own experience in this arena, but I am extremely confident disability can be entirely faked, as well as not necessarily faked but definitely bought into by people who convince themselves of their own hopelessness and feel honest in arguing they "can't" overcome their current state of misfortune.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 07-27-12 at 03:37 AM.

  2. #1192
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Hard to say those studies exist, given the data belongs to the state and I am not sure how accessible it is to researchers. But pretending for a moment these studies do exist, what percentage of false/questionable claims would convince you the program is wrought with fraud vulnerability?

    Chances are it's all going to be subjective anyway. Let's say a bricklayer becomes physically damaged and never gathered skills to be anything other than a bricklayer, but has nothing wrong with his speech or mental functioning. Is he disabled? From being a bricklayer, yeah. But from a variety of other jobs he could apply himself toward and strive for? Each case is unique and I'm betting a majority of disabled folks (assuming the disability is not due to psychosis or developmental disability/retardation/etc.) theoretically could strive toward other work but feel hopeless about their prospects, and so they hop around from doctor's office to doctor's office seeking endorsement to be on disability. This is all subjective and case-by-case, and I'm not going to make appeals to my own experience in this arena, but I am extremely confident disability can be entirely faked, as well as not necessarily faked but definitely bought into by people who convince themselves of their own hopelessness and feel honest in arguing they "can't" overcome their current state of misfortune.
    I don't think the data does exist, which I think is a problem. It should exist.

    I also don't have a firm number, but less that 10% wouldn't scare me too much, considering the scope of the program.

    As for your brick layer, I see a lot who don't end there. Have a fellow I know right now who had a siginifcant head injury. His memory is serverly hindered. But efforts to re-educate and move him on to something else are part of his program. To be honest, it might cheaper not to try and train him, but he is trying. And I respect that.

    Over the years I've worked with a lot of good people handling problems and moving on. I don't have numbers, but I'm convinced a lot of people dumbed their McDonald's coffee and didn't sue. I've met mothers working three jobs and raising their kids alone, who somehow managed. I've even seen folks get on wlefare, improve thier lives, and contribute as tax payers. Somehow, they don't make the stories people tell. But then again, no one talks about traffic running smoothly either.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  3. #1193
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Translation: Proving evidence is hard.
    No, you ARE the evidence.

    No, that refered to roads. You doing the lazy dishonest partisan sheep thing.
    No, that refered to businesses. Earlier he refered to roads. You're doing the dishonest partisan word rearranging thing.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  4. #1194
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    This issue. As for my partisanship, I've asked for you to provide evidence as to what makes me partisan. Feel free to give it a shot.
    The fact that you claim you are nonpartisan while calling me partisan for differing on opinion on this issue. That alone makes you a card carrying partisan.

    Next?
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  5. #1195
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    The fact that you claim you are nonpartisan while calling me partisan for differing on opinion on this issue. That alone makes you a card carrying partisan.

    Next?
    Hardly. What makes you partisan is not a difference of opinion, but ignoring fact to accept a lie. No reasonable or honest person, unless of course their just stupid (which I don't think you are) believes the opinion you spouted. The most logical explanation is partisan. For me to be equal, I'd have to believe Bush was Hitler.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #1196
    Advisor Romulus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    12-28-14 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    324

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    No, you miss the point. They don't have people who can push for regulations. You mistakenly think the two are separate. But regulations largely have a history, and largely promoted by people. Government doesn't come to them on their own. When that si the case, you have China. So, you merely missed the point.
    I nailed your point exactly. You held up China as having unsafe consumer products, and I agree they do. However, you think the cause is lack of regulation when in fact China has very little economic freedom relative to the U.S. Your answer? Become more like China. My answer, is to have consumer products truly "promoted by the people" by allowing them freedom of choice over what they consume. You want to force your choices on other people...you want to utilize the power of the state to coerce people into buying CFLs instead of incandescent bulbs, or regulate the size of soft-drink they drink. Such laws, although they have the blessing a democratic majority, are no less tyrannical than China's communist regime.

    It should be noted too, established regulatory agencies in the U.S. act in the same manner as China's communist apparatchik. Even though these agencies were established through democratic means, they create regulations with delegated authority, and have the ability to coerce (levy large fines, shut down businesses) all without the due process of law, and without those regulations being approved by elected legislatures.

  7. #1197
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Romulus View Post
    I nailed your point exactly. You held up China as having unsafe consumer products, and I agree they do. However, you think the cause is lack of regulation when in fact China has very little economic freedom relative to the U.S. Your answer? Become more like China. My answer, is to have consumer products truly "promoted by the people" by allowing them freedom of choice over what they consume. You want to force your choices on other people...you want to utilize the power of the state to coerce people into buying CFLs instead of incandescent bulbs, or regulate the size of soft-drink they drink. Such laws, although they have the blessing a democratic majority, are no less tyrannical than China's communist regime.

    It should be noted too, established regulatory agencies in the U.S. act in the same manner as China's communist apparatchik. Even though these agencies were established through democratic means, they create regulations with delegated authority, and have the ability to coerce (levy large fines, shut down businesses) all without the due process of law, and without those regulations being approved by elected legislatures.
    They have little economic freedom, but no push for regualtion from people; therefore, no regualtions that protect people. Can you not see this point?

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  8. #1198
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Hardly. What makes you partisan is not a difference of opinion, but ignoring fact to accept a lie. No reasonable or honest person, unless of course their just stupid (which I don't think you are) believes the opinion you spouted. The most logical explanation is partisan. For me to be equal, I'd have to believe Bush was Hitler.
    I'm not ignoring anything...he said what he said. Is it being exagerated? Sure. Did he walk it back moments later? Sure. He still said what he said, and your partisanship has you making excuses for him.

    Reasonable and honest people believe reasonable and honest people (which I believe Obama is) say what they mean. He has a viewpoint he clearly expressed. His views are at odds with mine on the issue, for sure, but that doesn't mean I think he's a Chavez clone.

    I've never seen you break party lines on a single issue, Boo. You are clearly partisan, or delusional (which I don't think you are).
    Last edited by mac; 07-27-12 at 01:58 PM.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  9. #1199
    Advisor Romulus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    12-28-14 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    324

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    They have little economic freedom, but no push for regualtion from people; therefore, no regualtions that protect people. Can you not see this point?
    I see your point clearly, what I'm trying to get through to you is the fact that by regulating free commerce (without concern to principles of natural law) you give regulatory agencies the same authority within their sphere as China has over her people.

    Here is an example, a new technology has developed called bump-stocks. Reveiw this video and tell me, for all practical purposes does this item not essentially convert the weapon to full auto?:



    The BATF has declared this technology legal, I can only assume this would be to your chagrin. The technical reason why this item should be legal or illegal are irrelevent to our discussion here, what is relevant is the fact an un-elected regulatory agency declared it legal. Even though full auto firearms have been highly restricted (illegal for most) for nearly a century, the BATF has made an executive or judicial decision without due process or without legislative authorization.

    I use this example, not because I think bump stocks should be illegal, but because their legality is an example of the delegated power of a regulatory agency. That type of authority by unelected, non-judicial bureaucrats is fundamentally similar to Chinese communism. These agencies have the authority to declare items/behavior legal or illegal without that input from "the people".

  10. #1200
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Romulus View Post
    I see your point clearly, what I'm trying to get through to you is the fact that by regulating free commerce (without concern to principles of natural law) you give regulatory agencies the same authority within their sphere as China has over her people.

    Here is an example, a new technology has developed called bump-stocks. Reveiw this video and tell me, for all practical purposes does this item not essentially convert the weapon to full auto?:



    The BATF has declared this technology legal, I can only assume this would be to your chagrin. The technical reason why this item should be legal or illegal are irrelevent to our discussion here, what is relevant is the fact an un-elected regulatory agency declared it legal. Even though full auto firearms have been highly restricted (illegal for most) for nearly a century, the BATF has made an executive or judicial decision without due process or without legislative authorization.

    I use this example, not because I think bump stocks should be illegal, but because their legality is an example of the delegated power of a regulatory agency. That type of authority by unelected, non-judicial bureaucrats is fundamentally similar to Chinese communism. These agencies have the authority to declare items/behavior legal or illegal without that input from "the people".
    So, let me this striaght, regulations that keep poison out of our PB is equal to lack of regulation in China that allows it in the PB? Is this your position?

    And who would want that weapon? For what purpose? And people are elected, who place people into roles, and these agencies have to adhere to rules and laws. These rules and alws are ususally pushed by people not in government. People who lobby and push elected officials. The government doesn't usually do this compeltely on their own. You have to know how this works.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •