Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:39 PM
 
Location: California
1,027 posts, read 1,377,604 times
Reputation: 844

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
You're going to have to continue to become more conservative so that you don't immediately dismiss what regulations mean... I don't have a lot of hope for liberals to do that though.

3,000 pages of new regulations with Obamacare alone. Then try Dodd/Frank and all his (Obama's) czars.

I'm curious as to your response on if you think those things are more or less regulatory.
Well, since the post I was referring to was pointing out that Jobs never complained to the previous President about regulations...

"If spending under Mr. Bush was a disaster, regulation was even worse. The number of pages in the Federal Registry is a rough proxy for the swollen expanse of the regulatory state. In 2001, some 64,438 pages of regulations were added to it. In 2007, more than 78,000 new pages were added. Worse still, argues the Mercatus Center economist Veronique de Rugy, Mr. Bush is the unparalleled master of "economically significant regulations" that cost the economy more than $100 million a year. Since 2001, he jacked that number by more than 70%. Since June 2008 alone, he introduced more than 100 economically significant regulations."

Opinion: Bush and Big Government - WSJ.com

So 3,000 additional pages and Jobs was like "Ok now that's just too much!" Lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:42 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,442,738 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNLV09 View Post
Well, since the post I was referring to was pointing out that Jobs never complained to the previous President about regulations...

"If spending under Mr. Bush was a disaster, regulation was even worse. The number of pages in the Federal Registry is a rough proxy for the swollen expanse of the regulatory state. In 2001, some 64,438 pages of regulations were added to it. In 2007, more than 78,000 new pages were added. Worse still, argues the Mercatus Center economist Veronique de Rugy, Mr. Bush is the unparalleled master of "economically significant regulations" that cost the economy more than $100 million a year. Since 2001, he jacked that number by more than 70%. Since June 2008 alone, he introduced more than 100 economically significant regulations."

Opinion: Bush and Big Government - WSJ.com

So 3,000 additional pages and Jobs was like "Ok now that's just too much!" Lol
Fail...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:44 PM
 
Location: Flyover Country
26,212 posts, read 19,504,016 times
Reputation: 21679
Watch and learn:

Biographer: Steve Jobs regretted refusing surgery - CBS News Video
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:44 PM
 
Location: outside of Deroit
227 posts, read 140,870 times
Reputation: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNLV09 View Post
Everything Jobs said I agree with and I consider myself a liberal. The regulation that needed to be implemented was on Wall Streets shadow banking practices and the Federal Reserve also needs to be restructured so we can stop these crazy boom-bust cycles. As for red tape on small businesses, manufacturing, and infrastructure, I fully agree with Jobs. And I definitely agree about unions in the schools. Unions have their place, but not in education.


But yet I bet you hate Walker and Christie. I bet you will still vote for the regulater in chief.

So you are for all those things that Obama is not but I am sure you will still vote for. Thats why this country is in dire trouble. You could never pull the lever for anyone that doesn't have a D next to the name.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:45 PM
 
56,989 posts, read 35,168,788 times
Reputation: 18824
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Answer my question. Why didn't Jobs tell other presidents that they'd have ONE TERM when according to conservatives, regulations on business have been burdensome for DECADES.

Answer that. And again, find a quote of Jobs discussing Obamacare. I'm not taking your word for it.

BTW...i'll stick to my belief that you're no different than anyone else on here. Working stiff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:46 PM
 
Location: Sarasota FL
6,864 posts, read 12,066,468 times
Reputation: 6744
How's this for insane regulation.
A volcano spews mega tons of ash and dust into the air. Can't do anything about that. Huge dust storms spews mega tons of dust on a southwest city. Can't do anything about that. BUT the EPA makes a farmer keep track of the amount of dust his tractor wheels kick up while he's plowing a field.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:46 PM
 
Location: it depends
6,369 posts, read 6,404,093 times
Reputation: 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
Funny...all of these regulations that he complained about existed under previous presidencies.

Did Steve Jobs ever tell any of those guys that they were headed for a single term?
The Federal Register has not published thousands of pages of new regulations under Obama? The EPA has launched no expansions of the Clean Air Act under Obama? Or declared CO2 an emission to be regulated? Dem legislation has not created vast new layers of bureaucracy for the productive sector to navigate, in the attempt to make "profit" which the president pronounces as a swear word?


Wake up, Rip Van Winkle. It is 2011 and the Obama administration is strangling the economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:47 PM
 
56,989 posts, read 35,168,788 times
Reputation: 18824
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0Newman0 View Post
But yet I bet you hate Walker and Christie. I bet you will still vote for the regulater in chief.

So you are for all those things that Obama is not but I am sure you will still vote for. Thats why this country is in dire trouble. You could never pull the lever for anyone that doesn't have a D next to the name.
So when the R's had all the power, why didn't they simply gut every single regulatory agency with the ultimate intention of closing them down?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:49 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,665,009 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by stayinformed40 View Post
Doesn't really matter. What matters is that he sure told the current idiot in chief what was going to happen. Thank goodness....one and done. Buh bye
So Jobs is now sitting at the right hand of God, bringing us God's word from the grave? I don't recall Jobs being a big player in politics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2011, 07:50 PM
 
56,989 posts, read 35,168,788 times
Reputation: 18824
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcopolo View Post
The Federal Register has not published thousands of pages of new regulations under Obama? The EPA has launched no expansions of the Clean Air Act under Obama? Or declared CO2 an emission to be regulated? Dem legislation has not created vast new layers of bureaucracy for the productive sector to navigate, in the attempt to make "profit" which the president pronounces as a swear word?


Wake up, Rip Van Winkle. It is 2011 and the Obama administration is strangling the economy.
I'm sorry, but right wingers have been complaining about regulations for as long as i can remember, and i started following politics some thirty years ago.

I'll ask you the same thing...when the R's had all the power, why didn't they simply gut the regulatory agencies to the point that these archaic rules would be unenforceable?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:51 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top