MileHighM
Posts: 400
Joined: 10/8/2009
Status: offline
|
Sam,
The cost of texts would be higher with more regulation b/c the gov't would prefer to tax each text sent. The reason they are high now is cause dumb shit parents payed for their kids cell phone bills and didn't whoop their ass for sending 5 million messages a month. If people didn't pay, they would be cheap. However, isn't it like 30$ a month for unlimited data and texts on most providers for a smart phone? Idk my sprint plan at 80$ month unlimited everything seems really fricken fair.
Seat belts laws are not really there to regulate the auto companies. They are there to regulate you. Look, they may have forced em into the cars, but they had to force people to start wearing them too. Example of bad regulation in the auto industry is oxygenated fuels. 30 years ago, they helped with CO emmissions. Now engines are far more efficient and won't generate all those emmissions. So the only thing oxygenated fuels do anymore is keep corn prices high, and ruin your gas mileage because they reduce the number BTUs/gal in gasoline.
Even the UN has come out against the US biofuel industry. Regulation has caused far too much interst in these fuels. As a result millions of acres of food producing land have been converted for biofuel crops. This has caused massive inflation in food prices. While it doesn't have a major effect here, people all over the world are struggling even worse to afford food, hell, even mexico has had tortilla riots over the price of masa.
Really, when you look at regulations there is a litmus test. Does this regulation maintain public safety? Or, does this regulation maintain a level playing field for fair competition? If the answer is 'Yes,' I say keep it. However, there are these questions. Does this regulation exist only support a particular political agenda? Does this regugulation exist to protect an industry or company from new immerging industries or companies? If the answer is 'Yes,' I say dump it quick. I think it is great that we have regulations that tell employers to pay overtime, ensure a car has reasonable safety measures installed, and prevent monopolistic behaviors in business. However, there exist crap regulations and subsidies, like ethanol (I know that has been recently changed), that cost us more and benefit us none. Most airline regulations of 50 years ago, were protectionist. Sure, we may have deregulated too much, but without any deregulation, none of the discount carriers like soutwest would exist today, and airfares would be $1800 round trip from LA to San Fran (airfare was stupid expensive 50 years ago, and look at inflation).
My arguement with you is in your OP where you make this a partisan debate. Both sides don't know the meaning of intellegent regulation. You argue that it is just the GOP who is opposed to regulation, not true. The DNC refuses to place any regulation on attornies and the alternative energy industry. We need tort reform, but we hear all the doom and gloom of people running around getting screwed cause they won't be able to sue anymore. BS, if the regulation is sensible. I work in the solar energy world, and we really need some regs. There are so many charlatans out there peddling crap that will 'change the world' but will only just drain your pocket book. It makes it a real struggle to gain legitimacy in the world when you are associated with such scum. Your partisanship has blinding you to the other side of the equation. Both Ds and Rs have their pets. Both will do anything to deregulate, keep unregulated, and subsidize their pets, while trying to regulate and cut-off the other's pets. The only answer to such nonsense is to keep regulation as broad and non-specific as possible. That way they effect all and not some.
|
RE: Deregulation is the answer? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread