Drowning in Law

[RabidMongoose]

The Republicans have promised to review each piece of new legislation for Constitutionality.

Yeah, because all politicians are constitutional lawyers.

Also, here is what most people, especially politicians, consider to be Constitutional: Whatever they support.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Who on the "left" told you this (and what does it have to do with excessive regulation and laws)? A specific quotation to an attributable source would be appreciated. Otherwise this appears to be misconstrued strawman garbage.

I actually got a call from Nancy Pelosi telling me, but I couldn't record the call because that would violate federal laws and regulations on wiretapping. Sorry. If you are going to stand on the left being for personal responsibility now on financial issues I'm not sure I can even argue with a straight face. If you want proof, just do a search for about any post in this forum regarding the current financial crisis.. Bush, Banks, Cheney, Big Business, the rich are all blamed for it. The common man is just a pawn in their game.

 

[theeedude]

"The Republicans have promised" means it probably won't happen when they get into power.

 

[PJABBER]

"The Republicans have promised" means it probably won't happen when they get into power.

Here is their "Pledge To America."

I think we should hold them to it, every single line.

In 2012 we should kick out every elected official, Republican and Democrat, that did not actively and fully support its tenets.

 

[drebo]

Its a state law. I thought "righties" were all about states' rights.

Badly written laws exist at all levels of government. That was part of the point of the OP.

Also note that the woman who was arrested simply wants the law clarified, not removed.

 

[LunarRay]

Here is their "Pledge To America."

I think we should hold them to it, every single line.

In 2012 we should kick out every elected official, Republican and Democrat, that did not actively and fully support its tenets.

" There once was a musical group
A picking singing folk group
We sang traditional ballads
And the folk songs of our land
We had musical ability
Folk said we would go far
But political incompatibility
Led to our downfall
Because the one on the right was on the left
And the one in the middle was on the right
And the one on the left was in the middle
And the one at the back played the banjo
This musical congregation
Toured round the nation
Singing Streets of London
And the folk songs of our land
We performed with virtuosity
Soon we were all the rage
But political animosity
Prevailed upon the stage
Because the one on the right was on the left
And the one in the middle was on the right
And the one on the left was in the middle
And the one at the back played the banjo
One night we began to play
And a hush fell on the crowd
Who had gathered in their thousands
To hear the folk songs of our land
We took our politics seriously
In the concert hall that night
While the audience watched deliriously
The group began to fight
And the one on the right was on the bottom
And the one in the middle was on the top
And the one on the left was in the middle
And the one at the rear said, Oh dear
So let this be a lesson
If you want to sing in a folk group
Never mix politics
With the folk songs of your land
Practise singing and diction
And play your banjo well
If you have political convictions
Just keep them to yourself
'Cause now the one on the right works in a bank
The one in the middle drives a truck
The one on the left is a d. j.
And the one at the back brought his banjo here today"

Ok... so who is who...

 

[werepossum]

Here is their "Pledge To America."

I think we should hold them to it, every single line.

In 2012 we should kick out every elected official, Republican and Democrat, that did not actively and fully support its tenets.

I agree completely. For my part, I can now hold my nose slightly less when I vote for them. I hope one day to be able to vote with both hands.

" There once was a musical group
A picking singing folk group
SNIP
WTF?
SNIP

Ok... so who is who...

Kids, this is your brain on drugs.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

I'm drowning in laws too!

Oh wait, no I'm not.

People who complain about drowning in laws IMO are whining about getting caught every time they try to break them!

 

[UberNeuman]

I wouldn't recommend drowning in-laws, as tiresome as they can be: murder is not an answer.

Find something you can all do together, like hacky sack or building ships inside bottles....

 

[jackace]

I am so sick of listening to people try to figure out the term "meaningful use" and how it applies to electronic medical record projects. My wife has probably spent over 200 hours this year trying to find out how the new medicare regulations affect property insurance claims. I don't know if it is anything new, but from personal experience, a lot of time is spent trying to figure out these rules.

Exactly, this is an example of what I'm talking about. The big players in the market can afford to hire all kinds of lawyers and spends millions in court if needed, but the small guys out there just can't do that. The playing field is not even when laws are written in such a manner.

 

[dmcowen674]

The sheer crush of law and regulation, the product of the busybee lawyers that constitute our government, has reached a critical mass, a mass that now stops initiative cold. It stops entrepreneurship and it stops the structural changes that distinguished America from its competitors.

I look forward to the changes coming in the government next year. What I am going to do is contact every newly elected official and argue for a wholesale reform and a pushback against the tidal wave of stultifying law and regulation that has crippled this country for too long.

The Republicans have promised to review each piece of new legislation for Constitutionality.

That is a start, but they need to review all the laws and regulations on the books, all those sacred cows of governmental prerogative, for usefulness and efficiency and act immediately to remove those that are millstones around American necks.

Only then will we see America fight its way out of economic malaise.

OP is an ID10T

Deregulation and low taxes by Republicans is what got us into this mess.

 

[nobodyknows]

Enjoy. Wabash Valley woman didn’t realize second cold medicine purchase violated drug laws

That certainly is a stupid law. Any other examples besides this one?

 

[Linflas]

That certainly is a stupid law. Any other examples besides this one?

Surely you can do your own research? Just today there is talk of some township outside Philladelphia wanting to pass a law whereby they can fine you if they find your car unlocked. There was a police chief in North Carolina that was in the news a few weeks back because he wanted a law passed to give him the names of all prescription medicine users. There was a time not so very long ago when the average American could go through life assured that the only law he was likely to break was some minor traffic infraction.

 

[shira]

Ok then how about a grandmother in Indiana that is arrested after buying too much cold medicine in too short a period of time? She bought a box for her husband and in less than 7 days bought another box for an adult daughter thereby triggering her arrest. That is just 1 example among the endless examples you can find just with a simple search on this topic. It is a real and growing issue and it really starts at the local level and grows as you move up the government food chain.

This story made the news because it was so exceptional, not because it was so typical. Why don't you provide us with "endless examples" of how being caught up in technical breaking of fussy little laws is blocking entrepreneurship in America?

 

[Linflas]

This story made the news because it was so exceptional, not because it was so typical. Why don't you provide us with "endless examples" of how being caught up in technical breaking of fussy little laws is blocking entrepreneurship in America?

This good enough for you? And even though I never mentioned entrepreneurship in any of my posts it even touches on that.

THREE pickup trucks pulled up outside George Norris’s home in Spring, Texas. Six armed police in flak jackets jumped out. Thinking they must have come to the wrong place, Mr Norris opened his front door, and was startled to be shoved against a wall and frisked for weapons. He was forced into a chair for four hours while officers ransacked his house. They pulled out drawers, rifled through papers, dumped things on the floor and eventually loaded 37 boxes of Mr Norris’s possessions onto their pickups. They refused to tell him what he had done wrong. “It wasn’t fun, I can tell you that,” he recalls.

Mr Norris was 65 years old at the time, and a collector of orchids. He eventually discovered that he was suspected of smuggling the flowers into America, an offence under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. This came as a shock. He did indeed import flowers and sell them to other orchid-lovers. And it was true that his suppliers in Latin America were sometimes sloppy about their paperwork. In a shipment of many similar-looking plants, it was rare for each permit to match each orchid precisely.

In March 2004, five months after the raid, Mr Norris was indicted, handcuffed and thrown into a cell with a suspected murderer and two suspected drug-dealers. When told why he was there, “they thought it hilarious.” One asked: “What do you do with these things? Smoke ’em?”

 

[alphatarget1]

The OP makes a very good point- are we over-legislating everything? Most of you probably violate some law unbeknown to you that was passed by some lawmakers.

You know where else has very strict (corruption) laws? China. I had a discussion with a friend and he said that you can't legislate everything. People have to be somewhat ethical for the society to function. The guy from Spring, TX who got thrown in jail for selling Orchids is a prime example of private citizens who as far as I am concerned did not commit a gross offense that endangers the society, yet he was thrown into a jail cell to people who commited offenses that endangers the society. Should private citizens consult an attorney before they do ANYTHING?

Of course there needs to be rules, but sometimes I think some rules are overbearing for individuals and businesses. The return of ethics at a personal level and common sense regulations go a long way to promote economic growth, IMO.

 

[shira]

This good enough for you? And even though I never mentioned entrepreneurship in any of my posts it even touches on that.

No, it's not good enough for me.

The point of this thread - "drowning in law" - is that if only would-be small business people didn't face such a daunting gauntlet of fussy laws standing between them and the promised land of entrepeneurial heaven our unemployment rate would be tiny and our economy would be healthy.

What you've posted is (1) a story about an orchid smuggler put behind bars linked to (2) a story about over-incarceration in the U.S. You won't get any argument from me that the "war on drugs" in the United States is so utterly stupid, self-destructive, and grossly iniquitous that only the insane or the religiously manaical (which might amount to the same thing) could think it makes any sense (look for my other post today in another thread on this very subject). But claiming that overincarceration resulting mainly from the war on drugs somehow demonstrates that over-regulation is blocking entrepeneurship in the United States is just plain false.

 

[Attic]

Agree with the OP and the points made supporting the idea that with too much regulation comes a severe price.

More laws isn't the answer. I'd prefer better law.

 

[PJABBER]

No, it's not good enough for me.

The point of this thread - "drowning in law" - is that if only would-be small business people didn't face such a daunting gauntlet of fussy laws standing between them and the promised land of entrepeneurial heaven our unemployment rate would be tiny and our economy would be healthy.

What you've posted is (1) a story about an orchid smuggler put behind bars linked to (2) a story about over-incarceration in the U.S. You won't get any argument from me that the "war on drugs" in the United States is so utterly stupid, self-destructive, and grossly iniquitous that only the insane or the religiously manaical (which might amount to the same thing) could think it makes any sense (look for my other post today in another thread on this very subject). But claiming that overincarceration resulting mainly from the war on drugs somehow demonstrates that over-regulation is blocking entrepeneurship in the United States is just plain false.

Hellooooo shira.

Welcome to the Internets.

This is your computer.

This is your keyboard.

Type in Google.

Type in "U.S. excessive regulation examples."

Countless examples appear.

It will seem like magic to a Phd physicist like you!

Residential Land & Regulation Cost Index: 2010
Ratings for 11 United States Metropolitan Markets

The increase in land and regulation cost is estimated to have added $220,000 to the price of entry-level new housing in San Diego and from $29,000 in Minneapolis-St. Paul to $74,000 in Washington-Baltimore. "Excessive regulations have driven house prices up strongly in some metropolitan areas, where the American Dream of home ownership could become a thing of the past," said Wendell Cox, principal of Demographia and a long-time visiting professor at a large Paris university. He added that "in other metropolitan areas, the Dream of home ownership remains alive and it is not surprising that households are flocking to these areas."

Cox went on to say that "this massive loss in housing affordability was an unanticipated consequence of regulations that have imposed urban growth boundaries, building moratoria, excessively expensive development impact fees and bureaucratic processes." Before the restrictive regulations were imposed, there was little difference in new or existing house prices relative to incomes between the nation's metropolitan areas.

More restrictive regulations often go by the innocent sounding labels of "smart growth" and "growth management," however these regulations are routinely adopted without any consideration of the longer term impacts on housing affordability and the standard of living for average Americans. These impacts are particularly ominous given the recession, proposals for higher tax increases and the possibility that job creation and economic growth may be less robust in the future.

Economic research has documented the association between more restrictive land use regulations and house prices. This reduces the standard of living by leaving less household income for other needs. Just as importantly, more restrictive land use regulations tend to reduce job creation and economic growth in the metropolitan areas where implemented.

Demographia is an international public policy consulting firm. Demographia is also publisher of the Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey, now in its sixth edition, which rates more than 275 metropolitan markets in six nations. This first Demographia Residential Land & Regulation Cost Index covers 11 metropolitan areas from around the United States and will be expanded to other areas in future editions.

An excellent read in the entirety, full of examples -

Is Excessive Regulation and Litigation Eroding U.S. Financial Competitiveness?

by Commissioner Paul S. Atkins
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

April 20, 2007

A specific case not related to orchids -

Ronald Myers, Hot Shot Equipment Co.

Ronald Myers no longer has to worry about the impact of a potential price on carbon or efforts to rewrite workplace regulations. That’s because existing regulations forced him to shut down his iron gate manufacturing shop in Prescott, Arizona.

“American businesses have been regulated out of existence in too many cases,” Myers says. “All the extra layers of required safety devices make it impossible to compete with the rest of the world.”

When Myers started his first business in 1971, he could use oil-based paints, which bonded with iron work. But in the last 10 years, EPA has “regulated oil-based paint out of existence,” Myers says. Now, the average life expectancy for exterior paint is 7 years, down from 15.

Myers, who estimates that he has worked on more than 17,000 jobs without any workplace claims or complaints, was also subject to Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements that impeded his craftspeople. “Everything around the shop has to have guards and attachments so workers can’t use their hands. The regulations and requirements make it tough for a medium-size business to compete with foreign suppliers who can use their hands to make their products.”

As well meaning as many labor and environmental regulations are, they have unintended consequences that impact successful employers. Further, while any one regulation may be reasonable, the collective weight of hundreds of rules and the confusion that often goes with them, can overwhelm employers.

The current administration appears to be set on adding to the burden. It is considering a Labor Department regulation pertaining to employee classification under the Fair Labor Standards Act, an effort by OSHA to impose its concept of safety and health programs, and still another that would change the way employers record ergonomics injuries and how many they would have to record.

I am sure that you, too, with a little effort, can find thousands of examples, learned commentaries and well crafted research on the topic.

Now if you would only try to do so yourself, before you post and before you criticize everyone else for, gasp! not doing it for you.

 

[BoberFett]

Here's a good one that's I'm currently contending with.

A small company I worked for a number of years back approached me recently about fixing some of their software that has had some growing pains. I've met with them a couple of times, done some research into replacements, and put together a presentation explaining my solution. Everything looks great, other than the fact that regulation is getting in the way of me simply going in and doing the work.

They're running into a headcount problem. As soon as a company has 50 employees there's a lot of additional regulation that kicks in, which means additional expense for the company. Since I'd only be coming on for a single project and then leaving, it hardly makes sense to go to that trouble for the 9 to 12 months I'd be there. If the company has to absorb the cost of compliance and top of what they actually pay me to do the job, the ROI simply isn't there.

Well, then the next obvious solution is for me to do the work as an independent contractor, right? Not so fast. Their accountant quickly put the smack down on that idea. Due to the nature of the project, my work for them would fail most of the 20 Questions. If you're not familiar with the 20 Questions, go look them up. They're the rules that the IRS uses to determine if someones position actually qualifies as an independent contractor or not. For various reasons such as security, proximity to data, collaboration with their developers, etc. the IRS, should it choose to investigate, would probably classify me as an employee and levy fines against the company for mis-classifying me. Be aware that Obama has increased the number of positions for tracking down mis-classified employees, so the IRS is on the warpath. Now I'm sure these rules were done with the good intention of preventing some sleazebag from paying people $6/hr and calling them contractors so they don't have to provide benefits. In this particular case though, the IRS is protecting me from billing $65/hr. Oh, the horror.

So while we hash out our options and try to figure out a simple thing like me doing some work and the company paying me, I'll just continue to draw unemployment instead.

Now that's good regulation.

 

[dmcowen674]

They're running into a headcount problem.

As soon as a company has 50 employees there's a lot of additional regulation that kicks in, which means additional expense for the company.

Sounds like they have no business being in business, the crooks and thugs.

Pay your fair share or leave.

Please let the door hit your ass hard on the way out.

 

[BoberFett]

Sounds like they have no business being in business, the crooks and thugs.

Pay your fair share or leave.

Please let the door hit your ass hard on the way out.

So you want the company to put another 49 people out of work?

And you think that a company that's good to it's employees should go under just because they don't want to get hit with the large costs of some arbitrary number of employees pulled out of a bureaucrats ass?

Dave, you're just another American hating traitor. Now go fail at something else.

 

[PJABBER]

So while we hash out our options and try to figure out a simple thing like me doing some work and the company paying me, I'll just continue to draw unemployment instead.

Now that's good regulation.

Even at the highest level of unemployment compensation it doesn't come close to $65/hr or, more accurately, the $35/hr you might net after taxes and expenses.

That's not good, it sucks.

As the second article that I pointed out shows so well, the greatest impact is often just time, the time that has to be devoted to research, to gathering and compiling and documenting bureaucratic data. In some cases the opportunity costs are approaching those imposed by the failed communist bureaucratic systems.

If your work would allow your client to move farther, faster, more efficiently in what they do, if it would make them more competitive, then there is the very real cost of lost opportunity.

Though it is great that you have some more down time to post here, the productivity you and your client lose will never be recovered.

Multiply the loss by the hundreds of thousands and you get an idea of why the entire system needs a shakeup.

 

[BoberFett]

I'm sure we'll figure out how to make it happen, but it's ridiculous that it even has to be done. Rather than simply getting paid for doing a job, there are so many hoops that have to be jumped through, no wonder companies off-shore. Employees in this country have become a liability rather than an asset.

 

[Linflas]

So you want the company to put another 49 people out of work?

And you think that a company that's good to it's employees should go under just because they don't want to get hit with the large costs of some arbitrary number of employees pulled out of a bureaucrats ass?

Dave, you're just another American hating traitor. Now go fail at something else.

The true irony is that he is so blinded by his hatred of all things corporate/Republican that he doesn't realize that the nonsense he got caught up in with his well publicized troubles in Georgia is just another symptom of the very topic of this thread.