Being Poor is NOT a Crime

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by hsmith

Uh, it is one of the factors which create barrier to entry. Are you going to enter the market when it is inefficent to do so?

People are not computers who calculate the most efficeint and equitable way of doing something before taking action. People are motiviated by greed, personal gratification and a host of other criteria.

[7960]

Originally Posted by hsmith

Uh, it is one of the factors which create barrier to entry. Are you going to enter the market when it is inefficent to do so?

I'd like to take a step back and have you clarify one thing......... do you believe *ANYONE* should be able to hang out a shingle and say "I'm a __________" (fill in with "doctor, medical professional, healer, etc" and say "You have cancer? I can cure it." Anyone.

?

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by hsmith

Grandfather laws have a lot to do with it.

You live there and some company moves in 10 years later and starts spewing toxic waste, you can bet your ass they'd lose big.

But if the company is in the middle of nowhere and you move next door, you have no case.

The way it was worked, the government went and fucked it all up. But I guess more government is the only solution!

It's still a reactionary system and requires that harm is done before the company can be held to account. It does nothing to prevent harm from occuring in the first place. THe problem is that people are greedy, want instant gratification, and don't believe that they will be held to account. So unless you monitor and regulate them, they will do things that are not in anyones best interest, even thier own, just so that they can make a quick buck.

[7960]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

It's still a reactionary system and requires that harm is done before the company can be held to account. It does nothing to prevent harm from occuring in the first place. THe problem is that people are greedy, want instant gratification, and don't believe that they will be held to account. So unless you monitor and regulate them, they will do things that are not in anyones best interest, even thier own, just so that they can make a quick buck.

"Let the free market take care of it! If someone wants to build a dynamite factory in the middle of a residential area then they should be able to. People won't like it and will not buy from them so they'll go out of business and will move their dynamite factory of out the neighborhood!!"



Of course, if the dynamite factory blow up before the free market gets it moved, oh well. It's more important to have a free system where anyone can do anything than it is to regulate dynamite factories and keep them from blowing up neighborhoods.

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by 7960

I'd like to take a step back and have you clarify one thing......... do you believe *ANYONE* should be able to hang out a shingle and say "I'm a __________" (fill in with "doctor, medical professional, healer, etc" and say "You have cancer? I can cure it." Anyone.

?

If you actually read what I said, claiming to be, claiming to be able to help someone, claiming that you have experience when you DON'T is FRAUD.

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by 7960

"Let the free market take care of it! If someone wants to build a dynamite factory in the middle of a residential area then they should be able to. People won't like it and will not buy from them so they'll go out of business and will move their dynamite factory of out the neighborhood!!"



Of course, if the dynamite factory blow up before the free market gets it moved, oh well. It's more important to have a free system where anyone can do anything than it is to regulate dynamite factories and keep them from blowing up neighborhoods.

The local government is free to zone the land.

The people are free to buy the land where the factor is being built, are they not?

[7960]

Originally Posted by hsmith

If you actually read what I said, claiming to be, claiming to be able to help someone, claiming that you have experience when you DON'T is FRAUD.

But you're saying there should be no barrier to entry, so anyone should be able to hang a shingle and say "I can cure cancer." If the first person I try my cure on dies *THEN* you'll know I was a fraud, but in your world I have to kill someone *FIRST*, don't I.

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by 7960

But you're saying there should be no barrier to entry, so anyone should be able to hang a shingle and say "I can cure cancer." If the first person I try my cure on dies *THEN* you'll know I was a fraud, but in your world I have to kill someone *FIRST*, don't I.

Then the responsibilty is on the individual getting the treatment to research their doctor.

What is wrong with that?

I can claim to sell you sugar pills that make your penis grow, but shouldn't you look into it to see if my claim is valid?

[7960]

Originally Posted by hsmith

Then the responsibilty is on the individual getting the treatment to research their doctor.

What is wrong with that?

What's wrong is this is irrational. You say you want pilots licensed (even though that goes against your "it's the responsibility of the individual to do their research" claim) but you don't think doctors should be licensed.

This is why (whatever form of govt you say this is) will never work. Because it's pretty naive to research every individual I come in contact with who will be providing a service.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by hsmith

Then the responsibilty is on the individual getting the treatment to research their doctor.

What is wrong with that?

I can claim to sell you sugar pills that make your penis grow, but shouldn't you look into it to see if my claim is valid?

Thank god that the idea of "Let the buyer beware" was disposed of a hundred years ago. It's the behavior of a totally self-centered uncivilized society.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by hsmith

If you actually read what I said, claiming to be, claiming to be able to help someone, claiming that you have experience when you DON'T is FRAUD.

It's not necessarily fraud. If there is no such thing as a license to practice medicine, then how is it fraud to hold yourself out as a doctor? The word "doctor" loses its meaning as we know it today. A "doctor" becomes anyone who claims to be one. As far as the efficacy of their treatments, yes, that could be fraud if they deliberately do things which they know won't work, but there is a lot of room for negligence and plain old quackery short of fraud.

[lew]

Originally Posted by 7960

What's wrong is this is irrational. You say you want pilots licensed (even though that goes against your "it's the responsibility of the individual to do their research" claim) but you don't think doctors should be licensed.

This is why (whatever form of govt you say this is) will never work. Because it's pretty naive to research every individual I come in contact with who will be providing a service.

People can be, and are, licensed by private entities, not the government.

[lew]

Originally Posted by 7960

my uncle didn't believe in chemotherapy... he died within 3 years.

my father did believe in chemotherapy... he's lived 22 years after his diagnosis.

My friend believed in chemotherapy. He died within 6 months.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by hsmith

Actually, the government was responsible for pollution as they didn't protect peoples property rights.

See, in the early 1800's, they protected peoples rights to sue others if pollution ran off on to their property. say a train's soot spewed onto your land, you could sue and get restitution.

after the lincoln era, that changed. they sided with businesses, so individuals no longer could sue the person who polluted on to their property.

So let me get this straight...you're proposing that all administrative agencies be abolished, and instead we let the tort system handle everything? My God, this is an ambulance chaser's dream! Of course, it'll mean having to quadruple the number of court houses and judges around the country because we already have clogged up dockets as it is.

[lew]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

So let me get this straight...you're proposing that all administrative agencies be abolished, and instead we let the tort system handle everything? My God, this is an ambulance chaser's dream! Of course, it'll mean having to quadruple the number of court houses and judges around the country because we already have clogged up dockets as it is.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by lew

People can be, and are, licensed by private entities, not the government.

Yep, and what happens there is a clusterfuck of private entities with fancy sounding names comes out of the woodwork, and people can no longer keep track of which private entities are reputable and which are license mills.

[lew]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

Yep, and what happens there is a clusterfuck of private entities with fancy sounding names comes out of the woodwork, and people can no longer keep track of which private entities are reputable and which are license mills.

Yes, they can.


ANYONE can find out anything about anyone with free news and google.

[7960]

Originally Posted by lew

People can be, and are, licensed by private entities, not the government.

I haven't agrued for who should do the licensing. I believe the AMA is not govt run (I'm not 100% on this though). He's saying "no licenses" and IMO it's a pretty ignorant view.

Originally Posted by lew

Yes, they can.


ANYONE can find out anything about anyone with free news and google.

And here's another.

1. you're assuming everyone knows what google is
2. you're assuming google doesn't have an interest in the search results outcome
3. you're assuming someone hasn't fucked with the search results to artificially get their page ranked higher

Last time I'll say it......these are the reasons why (whatever form of govt you say this is) will never be popular.

[WickedLou9]

IF you want to back up to a bird's eye view, the government is just an extension of the free market. We chose to set up this government and we pay it for a service that it provides to us.

[lew]

Originally Posted by 7960

I haven't agrued for who should do the licensing. I believe the AMA is not govt run (I'm not 100% on this though). He's saying "no licenses" and IMO it's a pretty ignorant view.


And here's another.

1. you're assuming everyone knows what google is
2. you're assuming google doesn't have an interest in the search results outcome
3. you're assuming someone hasn't fucked with the search results to artificially get their page ranked higher

Last time I'll say it......these are the reasons why (whatever form of govt you say this is) will never be popular.

Even Bush has used "the google" so I'm pretty sure most people know what it is. If they don't, they can watch the news.


And I have no problem with licensing - as long as it is an independent licensing firm that can be held accountable - unlike the government.