Regulation: hinderence, necessary evil, or political rhetoric? (1 Viewer)

[Kushinator]

I hear on a daily basis how regulation is "keeping me from expanding", or how "regulation is costing me money". Yet when pressed for clear cut examples, it always comes back to the Affordable Care Act or Dodd Frank.

But back in reality, what kinds of regulation are actually hurting business? I will provide a regulation that is a burden on business, while providing NO protection to society. Hopefully, we as a forum can put together a list of regulations that serve no purpose other than to politically appease a specific demographic.

In the state of Florida, it is legal for any restaurant/bar or tavern to change the prices of their liquor and food throughout the day. Patrons refer to this as "happy hour". In the state of Indiana, it is illegal to offer happy hour in any establishment that serves alcohol. Even ladies night is illegal.

WHY??? Who the **** knows. It is also illegal to sell retail alcoholic beverages on Sunday or religious holidays in the state of Indiana.

Can anyone else provide examples of regulations that need to die? Please, no ACA or DF.

 

[mak2]

Happy hour used to be a couple of hours after work you could get dollar beers some something like that. The good and bad thing about that was most guys would go in and hammer 4 or 5. The good thing was it was cheap, the bad thing was you had to drive after hammering several drinks. Indiana also has a law about selling carry out within so many yards of a fire station.

I hear on a daily basis how regulation is "keeping me from expanding", or how "regulation is costing me money". Yet when pressed for clear cut examples, it always comes back to the Affordable Care Act or Dodd Frank.

But back in reality, what kinds of regulation are actually hurting business? I will provide a regulation that is a burden on business, while providing NO protection to society. Hopefully, we as a forum can put together a list of regulations that serve no purpose other than to politically appease a specific demographic.

In the state of Florida, it is legal for any restaurant/bar or tavern to change the prices of their liquor and food throughout the day. Patrons refer to this as "happy hour". In the state of Indiana, it is illegal to offer happy hour in any establishment that serves alcohol. Even ladies night is illegal.

WHY??? Who the **** knows. It is also illegal to sell retail alcoholic beverages on Sunday or religious holidays in the state of Indiana.

Can anyone else provide examples of regulations that need to die? Please, no ACA or DF.

 

[jmotivator]

Regulation: hinderence, necessary evil, or political rhetoric?


Answer: Yes.

 

[HonestJoe]

In the state of Florida, it is legal for any restaurant/bar or tavern to change the prices of their liquor and food throughout the day. Patrons refer to this as "happy hour". In the state of Indiana, it is illegal to offer happy hour in any establishment that serves alcohol. Even ladies night is illegal.

So called "Happy Hours" (which are usually neither) encourage problem drinking with all the social harm and costs that carries. You can question the specifics but the intent is undeniably protecting both individuals and a society as a whole.

It is also illegal to sell retail alcoholic beverages on Sunday or religious holidays in the state of Indiana.

I suspect that's a historic law that couldn't be addressed without the politicians in question being condemned as anti-Christian (a death sentence for a US political career).

 

[Masada]

There are literally thousands of specific examples. The reason so many people cite the ACA is because it's laced with lots of new regulations. But I'll list one that I think has a drastic effect on our economy.

Obama mandated a new regulation in 2009, that 40% of ALL corn production in the US go towards the production of corn based ethanol. Why? To appease the green energy donors. There are lots of side effects to this regulation. Corn is the number one food ingredient in the world, and now 40% of ALL corn production isn't used for human consumption. This drives the price of corn up drastically, which drives the price of food up. Since America is the world's largest exporter of corn, it's driving food prices up globally.

For example, next time you are in the grocery store, stop and look at the price of hamburger meat. 4 years ago, it was $1.80/pound. Today, it's closer to $5/pound. You may ask yourself, "what does corn have to do with hamburger meat?". Great question. American beef that we buy in the grocery store is "finished beef", which means that the steer, or cow that that meat came from, was "finished" in a feed yard somewhere in America, probably the midwest or Texas. What does that mean? Beef cattle are "finished out" with corn feed, which gives meat it's "marbeling" and good taste. So, if it's more expensive to feed cattle, it drives the price of beef up as well.

This hurts middle class families and the poor disproportionately. I doubt Obama is worried about the price of meat personally. But much of America is.

That's one example of "overregulation" simply because of political ideology. To support corn based ethanol, which by the way, pollutes more, is less efficient, and is hard on engines. Bad idea all the way around.

 

[Masada]

So called "Happy Hours" (which are usually neither) encourage problem drinking with all the social harm and costs that carries. You can question the specifics but the intent is undeniably protecting both individuals and a society as a whole.

I suspect that's a historic law that couldn't be addressed without the politicians in question being condemned as anti-Christian (a death sentence for a US political career).

God forbid you trust the discretion of the tavern owner, or bartender serving the drinks......I mean, there are laws that punish bartenders for over serving just as harshly as on the person who drives drunk. Another prime example of how government knows best, even when they aren't even there.

 

[HonestJoe]

God forbid you trust the discretion of the tavern owner, or bartender serving the drinks.

Isn't that really an argument for no regulations and no laws at all. If we should trust bartenders to do the right thing, shouldn't we trust everyone else?

That sad fact is that no everybody can be trusted to do the right thing and where the wrong thing can be harmful, directly or indirectly, there needs to be regulation and laws. The only question is the balance, not the principal.

 

[Dittohead not!]

You can't widen the road, because there are elderberry bushes beside it and there could possibly be endangered longhorn elderberry beetles there. There probably aren't, but there could be.
You can't remodel that building without spending an extra couple of million outfitting it to conform to the ADA, so you simply don't remodel it and it serves no one well.
You must have a seal on all medicines and foods, because a couple of decades ago someone returned Tylenol to the shelf after having poisoned it.
You have to take off your shoes at the airport because some idiot tried to set off a "shoe bomb" and bring down the aircraft.

Is there some logic behind regulations? sure. Are we over regulated? What do you think?

 

[StillBallin75]

I hear on a daily basis how regulation is "keeping me from expanding", or how "regulation is costing me money". Yet when pressed for clear cut examples, it always comes back to the Affordable Care Act or Dodd Frank.

But back in reality, what kinds of regulation are actually hurting business? I will provide a regulation that is a burden on business, while providing NO protection to society. Hopefully, we as a forum can put together a list of regulations that serve no purpose other than to politically appease a specific demographic.

In the state of Florida, it is legal for any restaurant/bar or tavern to change the prices of their liquor and food throughout the day. Patrons refer to this as "happy hour". In the state of Indiana, it is illegal to offer happy hour in any establishment that serves alcohol. Even ladies night is illegal.

WHY??? Who the **** knows. It is also illegal to sell retail alcoholic beverages on Sunday or religious holidays in the state of Indiana.

Can anyone else provide examples of regulations that need to die? Please, no ACA or DF.

This isn't particularly specific but many libertarians would argue that certain forms of licensing requirements (if not all) are a way to restrict competition.

 

[Masada]

Isn't that really an argument for no regulations and no laws at all. If we should trust bartenders to do the right thing, shouldn't we trust everyone else?

That sad fact is that no everybody can be trusted to do the right thing and where the wrong thing can be harmful, directly or indirectly, there needs to be regulation and laws. The only question is the balance, not the principal.

Who's in a better position to judge? The big ole gubment? Or the person serving the drinks? The point about bad regulation is, it promotes the idea that government can regulate every aspect according to what THEY think is best for society. I happen to think the bartender serving the drinks knows "what's better" for the drunk at the bar than a bloated bureaucratic system of blanket rules.

 

[Masada]

Isn't that really an argument for no regulations and no laws at all. If we should trust bartenders to do the right thing, shouldn't we trust everyone else?

That sad fact is that no everybody can be trusted to do the right thing and where the wrong thing can be harmful, directly or indirectly, there needs to be regulation and laws. The only question is the balance, not the principal.

It's not an argument for "no regulations at all", it's a call for common sense and self-governing society. I don't know about you, but I don't need government taking care of me every step of my life.

I wanna build a metal shop out back, but I need a permit for this, a permit for that, a permit to get a permit. Just in permits, the building is going to cost me $2500 more than what it actually costs. Who is that protecting? I'll tell you, government jobs. Our government is so big and bloated, the scavange society looking for more money. How do they get it? New regulations, new permits, traffic tickets, fines, higher tax rates, etc.

No thanks.....I can do without all that, but they cant. They have to do all these burdensome things, just to meet the public payroll, and it's bull****.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

Who's in a better position to judge? The big ole gubment? Or the person serving the drinks? The point about bad regulation is, it promotes the idea that government can regulate every aspect according to what THEY think is best for society. I happen to think the bartender serving the drinks knows "what's better" for the drunk at the bar than a bloated bureaucratic system of blanket rules.

Are there some regulations you do think are necessary?

For example safety standards for oil refinarys to prevent oil or gas explosions?

 

[winston53660]

It's not an argument for "no regulations at all", it's a call for common sense and self-governing society. I don't know about you, but I don't need government taking care of me every step of my life.

I wanna build a metal shop out back, but I need a permit for this, a permit for that, a permit to get a permit. Just in permits, the building is going to cost me $2500 more than what it actually costs. Who is that protecting? I'll tell you, government jobs. Our government is so big and bloated, the scavange society looking for more money. How do they get it? New regulations, new permits, traffic tickets, fines, higher tax rates, etc.

No thanks.....I can do without all that, but they cant. They have to do all these burdensome things, just to meet the public payroll, and it's bull****.

Move to Texas you can build a fertilizer plant in your backyard and carry insufficient insurance insurance for when it goes boom because there is no fire code.

 

[CalGun]

A small retail shop depends on a certain level of volume. People will pay $2 for the item served. When I say retail I mean a food item. It takes the shop owner 10 people at 25 hours each to provide the service. A state, CA, mandates the employees take a class that costs $75 on food safety even though the shop has never even had a complaint about making anyone I'll. That costs $1000 because you have to pay labor for the class time too. The owner was going to use the $1000 on a new sign to increase business but can't. So the 2 people he would save hired due to the increased business lose out thanks to a safety regulation on food service that some how billions of people survived with out.

 

[Kushinator]

This isn't particularly specific but many libertarians would argue that certain forms of licensing requirements (if not all) are a way to restrict competition.

Redundant professional licensing requirements, e.g. state licensing for a physical therapist, is revenue creation scheme (and terribly uncreative i might add). There are some licensing requirements that are necessary. For example, a HVAC contracting license requires proof of insurance. If an HVAC contractor decides, for any reason, to cancel their general liability insurance, they can be fined and/or have their license suspended.

That contractors, by law, must purchase general liability insurance is the poster child for good regulation.

 

[Kushinator]

I wanna build a metal shop out back, but I need a permit for this, a permit for that, a permit to get a permit. Just in permits, the building is going to cost me $2500 more than what it actually costs. Who is that protecting? I'll tell you, government jobs. Our government is so big and bloated, the scavange society looking for more money. How do they get it? New regulations, new permits, traffic tickets, fines, higher tax rates, etc.

Some permits are actually necessary. They prevent people from building whatever the **** they want without any consideration for their neighbors. If you are located right next to a library, your permit to build a metal fab shop would rightfully be rejected.

 

[HonestJoe]

Who's in a better position to judge? The big ole gubment? Or the person serving the drinks?

On whether an individual drinker has had enough and shouldn't be served any more drinks? The bar-tender, assuming they're appropriately educated and/or managed. On the question of whether "Happy Hours" create wider social harm and costs? Government, assuming they take the appropriate independent professional advice. That's I was only discussing the latter.

 

[Kushinator]

For example, next time you are in the grocery store, stop and look at the price of hamburger meat. 4 years ago, it was $1.80/pound. Today, it's closer to $5/pound. You may ask yourself, "what does corn have to do with hamburger meat?". Great question. American beef that we buy in the grocery store is "finished beef", which means that the steer, or cow that that meat came from, was "finished" in a feed yard somewhere in America, probably the midwest or Texas. What does that mean? Beef cattle are "finished out" with corn feed, which gives meat it's "marbeling" and good taste. So, if it's more expensive to feed cattle, it drives the price of beef up as well.

The recent surge in beef prices is due to herd thinning strategies resulting from last years drought. USDA ERS - U.S. Drought 2012: Farm and Food Impacts

 

[Masada]

Are there some regulations you do think are necessary?

For example safety standards for oil refinarys to prevent oil or gas explosions?

Sure, oil companies shouldn't be allowed to purposefully spill oil out into our oceans, in our lakes, or rivers. Geez....

But look at it this way. Right now, there is a new regulation, that if it's implemented, would shut down refineries. It's a regulation pertaining to atmospheric CO2 within 1 mile of a refinery. Right now, the regulation states that a 5% maximum reading is allowed. The Obama administration has proposed a 1% maximum reading within a 1 mile radius. 1%.

Now think about it. There's no way this can be accomplished, unless of course, you shut down the refinery, or spend millions upon millions of dollars remodeling the refinery. This is a prime example of "forcing" companies into a certain way of doing business, or face closure.

In another thread, about the "working class", I argue the same thing about regulations, and here's the MOST important thing for you to consider. LIBERALS are the ones that support all these new regulations on emissions and pollution. They are the ones pushing all this green energy crap. But then they turn around and point fingers at companies who ship jobs overseas to avoid losing so much money!

The more you regulate these industries, manufacturing, oil and gas, farming, coal mining, ranching, forestry, refineries, for polluting, the more labor based jobs you lose to overseas labor markets. Because a regulation acts just like a tax. It cuts into the bottom lines of companies and industries, and that effects jobs in America. But one of the most popular bitches of the left, is the outsourcing of jobs. But they are too damn ignorant to recognize that it's THEIR philosophies and politics that are driving them overseas.

 

[Masada]

The recent surge in beef prices is due to herd thinning strategies resulting from last years drought. USDA ERS - U.S. Drought 2012: Farm and Food Impacts

Recent? This has gone on for 4 years. This adds to the problem, and here's why. In a drought, ranchers run out of pasture, or natural grass for the cattle to eat. So, they are faced with one of two choices, feed them (which costs lots of money), or sell them to feedlots (get rid of them).

Very few ranchers can afford to feed cattle year round, so the majority of them got rid of them, or "thinned their herds".

This furthers my argument that Obama's corn regulation should of been repealed. Now that more and more cattle are offloaded to feeders, more corn is needed to feed them out, but the regulation mandates that 40% of all domestic production go towards corn ethanol production, not for human consumption.

The drought exacerbated the problem, but even before the height of the drought, corn prices doubled in a year. That wasn't because of the drought. Ranchers aren't getting twice what they were 4 years ago for their cattle at market, but beef prices are up 300%, which also proves it's not about what you are suggesting. Feeder cattle are running about $1.31/lb, and futures are in the $1.51 range by year's end, despite the midwest coming out of the drought. Corn isn't in the ground yet either, another reason for future prices going higher for now. I suspect this wont last, because the midwest is getting rain, and it looks like if it continues, the corn will make this year.

In 2010, 70% of the midwest's corn crop was harvested for SILAGE, not even for the grain. Do you know what that means? But did the government suspend the ethanol mandated regulation? Nope. Thus, food prices surged again.

Pay attention. It's not all ONE THING, like a regulation or a drought. Here's the difference though, we can't control the weather and when it rains, but we can damn sure control government regulations.

 

[Masada]

On whether an individual drinker has had enough and shouldn't be served any more drinks? The bar-tender, assuming they're appropriately educated and/or managed. On the question of whether "Happy Hours" create wider social harm and costs? Government, assuming they take the appropriate independent professional advice. That's I was only discussing the latter.

Sugar and salt cause far more harm overall.....so maybe you are in agreement with progressive liberals who suggest the government intervene on behalf of society and regulate sugar and salt more aggressively, perhaps even banning them?

Hey, if you really wanted to do society some good, why not just ban alcohol alltogether?

What "independent professional" advice are you talking about? Since when does government actually listen to society? They didn't listen to small businesses concerning Obamacare. They aren't listening to Arizona and Texas on immigration reform. They don't listen to big corporations who are shipping jobs overseas. They don't listen when society votes down gay marriage. They don't listen to society when it comes to spending money. But somehow they're going to listen to society when it comes to serving people at happy hours????

come on now.....

 

[Gipper]

Outside of banking/finance, it's ultimately a minor blip if anything.

 

[Masada]

The recent surge in beef prices is due to herd thinning strategies resulting from last years drought. USDA ERS - U.S. Drought 2012: Farm and Food Impacts

Also, I'll note this. When ranchers "thin" their herds, there is an overabundance of beef cattle in the feed lots, and an overabundance of milk cows in the dairies. Hence, THE SUPPLY is bigger.

What generally happens to a commodity when there is an overabundance of supply? That's right, the price GOES DOWN. But the price of beef, nor the price of milk ever went down, and in fact, went up dramatically. Hmmmm.....

Give that some thought.....

The major drought wasn't "last year" either, not for MOST of the cattle producers. The worst was in 2009. More beef cattle (cattle raised for human consumption) are raised in Texas than any other place. While it's been bad, and I mean bad here for 5 years, 2009 was by far the worst. We are starting to get some rains now, but cattle prices are still high, corn prices are still high, and the price of hamburger meat keeps going up.

 

[HonestJoe]

Sugar and salt cause far more harm overall.....so maybe you are in agreement with progressive liberals who suggest the government intervene on behalf of society and regulate sugar and salt more aggressively, perhaps even banning them?

That's a hugely questionable comparison at best. I think the volumes of sugars and salts in processed foods remains too high but I don't think direct regulation is the best way to address that. Accurate labelling (by regulation if necessary) is probably the way to go - people tend not to be drunk when they go shopping so can better make informed decisions.

Hey, if you really wanted to do society some good, why not just ban alcohol alltogether?

Because it's not necessary and wouldn't work anyway. I'm not saying alcohol is bad, I'm saying "Happy Hours" promote it's use in a bad way. I'm talking about striking a reasonable balance.

What "independent professional" advice are you talking about?

Scientists, experts, people providing raw factual data. It's true that most governments don't listen to such people anything like as much as they should, which is why I put in that caveat. Bar tenders are even less likely to listen to them at all though.

 

[Masada]

That's a hugely questionable comparison at best. I think the volumes of sugars and salts in processed foods remains too high but I don't think direct regulation is the best way to address that. Accurate labelling (by regulation if necessary) is probably the way to go - people tend not to be drunk when they go shopping so can better make informed decisions.

Because it's not necessary and wouldn't work anyway. I'm not saying alcohol is bad, I'm saying "Happy Hours" promote it's use in a bad way. I'm talking about striking a reasonable balance.

Scientists, experts, people providing raw factual data. It's true that most governments don't listen to such people anything like as much as they should, which is why I put in that caveat. Bar tenders are even less likely to listen to them at all though.

I think our fundamental difference is you seem to trust government far more than I do, or perhaps you simply think they are the "best" vehicle for common sense regulation. Their track record doesn't support that though.

Happy Hours promote more drinking. This is the rational thought process of most people, and you wont find me disagreeing with that statement. However, when the exact same logic is applied to other issues, the rationality goes away, the exact same logic disappears. THIS is what proves political motivation, not the well being of society.

For instance, if happy hours promote the use of alcohol in a bad way, wouldn't making it easier to get on welfare promote poverty in a bad way? Yet progressives deploy the logic in one case, and eliminate it for another. This proves political bends and motivations, which is why government ISN'T the best vehicle for "reasonably balanced" regulation. If a tavern owner can't see that it's better for his business to regulate how much alcohol he serves to a single patron, he won't be in business long. If a bartender doesn't see that it's in his best interest to not overserve a drunk, knowing he could be jailed and fined for doing so, he'll either conform to the law, or get caught sooner or later.

I'd like to see the "raw data" on how happy hour statistically causes more societal harm though......

Perhaps these progressives don't like how happy hour "entices" people to drink alcohol? If that's it, why don't they look at how providing cheaper, more accessible abortion access makes abortion a more "enticing" choice for women.

If a bar has "happy hour", aren't they intentionally ENTICING people to come in and drink? If our government allows insurance to cover abortion, the cost of abortions keep going down, the accessibility to get an abortion is promoted and funded by government, and abortificants become "over the counter" pills, isn't the government ENTICING women to have more abortions? Kinda contradicts their claims of wanting abortion to be "rare" right?

This is what I'm talking about. They pick and choose, because they are narcicistic to the core, and they believe THEY know what's best for society.