I recently read that of the list of things that business feel burdened by regulations were about 5th or 6th on the list garnering about 3% of the answers. sales, the economy, shareholders, hiring all came in much higher. The only people busting our chops about regulations are the Republican candidates. IF and when they get elected that stomping point is quickly forgotten as business as usual begins

Uhh... I think you are mistaken about this.

Per the Oct 3rd to 6th, 2011 Gallup poll of small business owners
http://www.gallup.com/poll/150287/Gov-Regulations-Top-Small-Business-Owners-Problem-List.aspx:

What is the most important issue facing small business owners like you today?

Complying with government regulations 22%
Consumer confidence 15%
Lack of consumer demand 12%
Lack of credit availability 10%
Poor leadership/Government/President 9%
Cash flow 7%
New healthcare policy 5%
Competition from big business and overseas 4%
Lack of jobs 4%

About 84,000 pages of new / changed U.S. Federal Government Regulations were added in 2010. And that was JUST in 2010, and just the Federal (don't forget state and local regulations too).
I have absolutely no idea how many total pages of U.S. Federal Government Regulations there are. I am not sure anybody knows for sure.

Back around 1990, I ran a not-so-small (fewer than 50 employees, but did business on every continent except Antarctica) small business. The cost of complying with regulations ran to several hundred thousand dollars one year. I was considering expanding that year to double the size of my warehouse and factory space (and number of employees), but it would have upped the cost of regulations to over US$1 million that year. And there were a lot fewer regulations back then.


Don't tell ME that excessive regulations are not a huge pain in the backside for the smaller businesses to deal with. If you mess up with them you end up paying a LOT in fines.

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

thats odd because this is what I read about

http://smallbusinessmajority.org/energy/index_national.php

Nearly half (46%) of employers surveyed cite their biggest concern to be economic uncertainty, while 43% feel most burdened by the rising costs of doing business. In contrast, only 13% of respondents believe regulation is their biggest problem and only 23% say taxes are their main concern.

Of course either survey can be skewed so either gallop is way off or this one is

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Major, once again you are correct. Life would be a lot simpler for all businesses with out regulations such as lead in paint, doing commerce with hostile foreign entities, pollution and many other annoyances. The list is almost infinite.

---

sarcasm?

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Skildude, justifiably, yes.

---

thats odd because this is what I read about

http://smallbusinessmajority.org/energy/index_national.php

Nearly half (46%) of employers surveyed cite their biggest concern to be economic uncertainty, while 43% feel most burdened by the rising costs of doing business. In contrast, only 13% of respondents believe regulation is their biggest problem and only 23% say taxes are their main concern.

Of course either survey can be skewed so either gallop is way off or this one is

Well, lets see...

Per their website, Small Business Majority is primarily an issue advocacy group focusing on healthcare reform and 'clean energy'. They are actively in favor of pro-government, pro-regulatory policies. They admit to using flawed, distorting techniques in their polling methodologies. Sounds to me like they are in Government's pocket on things.

Gallop is a world recognized, highly reputable polling company.

Gallop is gonna have my vote on which poll is closer to being accurate.

But, no matter how you slice it, *excessive* regulation is a large problem for businesses in the USA, especially the smaller ones that can't afford to keep a large staff of bureaucrats on staff to keep them from running afoul of the ever changing, immense pile of crap coming out of Washington, DC.

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

I suppose we can all remember the good old days of no regulation -- but perhaps we also need to revert all technology and all other conditions to those good old days at the same time.

Major, once again you are correct. Life would be a lot simpler for all businesses with out regulations such as lead in paint, doing commerce with hostile foreign entities, pollution and many other annoyances. The list is almost infinite.

Sigh...

Now I never called for the elimination of ALL regulation on business. A certain, small amount of regulation can be a good thing. You missed a previous post in this thread where I bemoaned the bank deregulation in 1980.

Lead paint and lead in gasoline were outlawed due to people suffering from lead poisoning, and rightly so.

Doing business with hostile foreign entities has been against the law for quite some time... It is called treason. I say take 'em out and hang 'em.

Pollution... Now then, great strides have been made over the last 50 years or so to clean up the environment. DDT, for instance. Even though DDT was a VERY useful pesticide, and has never been adequately replaced by something as good let alone better, it was still banned. The DDT accumulated in the top of the food chain predators and caused massive problems, most notably in eagles with their eggshells thinned to a dangerously thin level.

Emissions of various oxides of nitrogen and sulphur has been heavily restricted. Very good for the environment as those oxides led to acid rain which was killing forests and wildlife in lakes.

Production and use of various CFCs has been heavily regulated if not banned, due to their effect on stratospheric ozone. We do NOT want surface UV levels anywhere near full strength.

The exhaust out of automobile tailpipes has been immeasurably cleaned up by removing almost all unburned hydrocarbons and particulate matter. The combustion products that come out nowadays are almost all CO2 and H2O, a far cry from back 40 some odd years ago when I was a child and almost every auto spewed blueish smoke and city air reeked.

'Many other annoyances'...

A few basic restrictions on business behaviors of certain sorts are a good thing. Things like 'do not fix prices', 'no bait & switch tactics in retail', and others along these lines are good.

Wait, if I am not condemning some regulations along the lines of 'do not screw your customers' and 'do not turn the environment into a toxic cesspool', then what am I going on about?

Well, I am going on about excessive regulation. The government has gone well beyond the common sense stuff and is trying to regulate every aspect of doing business. About the only thing that they do not yet try to regulate is whether the owner wears boxer shorts or briefs... And those regulations are on the way most likely.

The government regulatory bureaucracy is a jobs program for bureaucrats. The more bureaucrats they have the more regulations they put out, and the more regulations they put out the more bureaucrats they need.

Is there any reason why an average hospital needs more administrative personnel pushing government regulatory paperwork than they have patient beds? Couldn't that money be spent on something better. You know, like patient care?

You said 'the list is almost infinite'. THAT is the problem... Where will it all stop?

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

Major, you've noted the case for 'reasonable regulation' -- I agree with you conceptually. I'd submit that reasonable people might differ as to what is reasonable versus unreasonable regulation.

I'd further submit in the current political environment we (perhaps as a function of the predominance of non-competitive districts) have a collection of increasingly unreasonable people making, blocking or killing laws. Some of these folks are unreasonable on the excessive regulation is good side and some of these folks are unreasonable on the all regulation is bad side.

So, instead of reasonable discussion regarding regulations, it is all polarized.

Often enough over here, the discussions avoid histrionic polarization -- and I appreciate that. Over in the Washington Post discussion boards, it seems that trolls from the left and the right work hard to insure that all discussion turns histrionic. It is not a pretty sight.

Major, you've noted the case for 'reasonable regulation' -- I agree with you conceptually. I'd submit that reasonable people might differ as to what is reasonable versus unreasonable regulation.

I'd further submit in the current political environment we (perhaps as a function of the predominance of non-competitive districts) have a collection of increasingly unreasonable people making, blocking or killing laws. Some of these folks are unreasonable on the excessive regulation is good side and some of these folks are unreasonable on the all regulation is bad side.

So, instead of reasonable discussion regarding regulations, it is all polarized.

Often enough over here, the discussions avoid histrionic polarization -- and I appreciate that. Over in the Washington Post discussion boards, it seems that trolls from the left and the right work hard to insure that all discussion turns histrionic. It is not a pretty sight.

Well, you and I would likely differ on the definition of 'reasonable'. Maybe 5% to 10% of current regulations are reasonable, with 90% to 95% excessive.

As to your statement about gridlock in Washington, D.C., well it is really a good thing. Very little of what Washington has tried to do has worked as intended, and all too frequently legislation passed to 'help' with a problem ends up having the opposite effect. The more gridlocked Washington is, the safer we are. Solutions to problems worked out by individuals and businesses in the private sector at least have a chance of working.

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

http://www.ehow.com/about_5413083_history-bank-deregulation.html

Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980
The Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 (DIDMCA) abolished state caps on interest rates that could be charged for primary mortgages, giving banks the incentive to approve mortgages for people with problematic credit histories. Banks made more money by charging higher rates to riskier customers, and a broader range of people were able to purchase homes.

Yet, Gary, you have often stated the problems with mortgages began during the Clinton administration? I didn't realize Clinton had begun his terms as early as 1980! I could have sworn it was Reagan. And looking at the other things listed at the site I link to and quote, more deregulation took place during the 1980s. Some during the 1990s is also listed. (1994-1999. Republican Revolution, COntract with America?)

While Reagan won the 1980 Presidential election, he was not in office until January 20th 1981, thus the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 was signed into law by his predecessor, Jimmy Carter.

Ouch. You're correct, Bobby. You caught me in an error I generally point out to others. :(

Thanks for keeping the discussion going, folks, during a very busy time for me.

Just to reboot the discussion, I'd say the answer is now clear. The advertisers are to blame: http://www.orderforeverlazy.com.

The natural state of the universe is constant change. What is good? What is the truth? The concept of "good" and "truth" change and have opposite meanings at different times. There is no such thing as one correct and obsolute viewpoint.

History marches forward despite our efforts to improve ourselves as a society. In recent times, we've added another class of people as we try to grasp that which is beyond our control--we have the poor class, the middle class and the rich class. For reasons of nature, we are born, we are raised, and we are taught to be in one of the above classes and to perpetuate it. By nature, the rich class exploits the middle class and the middle class exploits the poor class.

What is success? There are some who define success as having found a suitable mate, one hot meal per day, a comfortable place to sleep, and one child. There are others who define success as becoming supreme ruler of the universe. Who's to decide what success is to each and everyone?

Who's to blame? No one... Every one...

If you mean the "midd;e c;ass" as being recently created, well, I think we could say then that recent is as little as 250 years and as much as 600-700 years. Bu the latter, without looking up specific years, I am referring, for example, to Italy in Renaissance times. Thus, I would say that the "middle class" was not "created" but arose as a natural consequence of such events. However, I feel, as I said a few months back, that we are "serfin' the waves of medieval times" lately, and this corresponds to one of your points. With the upper class exploiting the middle class, we are being squeezed, and I wonder if eventually we will be serfs again?

The natural state of the universe is constant change. What is good? What is the truth? The concept of "good" and "truth" change and have opposite meanings at different times. There is no such thing as one correct and obsolute viewpoint.

P.S.-I did not expect your opening paragraph from you. Since my junior year of college, I have believed myself to be mostly a pragmatist. But though there is some shifting in what is considered good and true as time passes, these concepts are not in complete random flux. We can trace our beliefs, laws we set up and follow, back thousands of years, to things such as the Hammurabi code. Perhaps more importantly, haven't researchers even found certain things about ethics are hardwired into us?

a dog never yearns for a master. Dogs(wolves) have a hierarchy that involves strength and intimidation to keep their fellow packmates in line. Lower cast pack dogs are not allowed to mate even when they are in heat. The lower cast also get last picking at feeding time.

Humans are not dogs though there are quite a few that insist on acting against their own best interest. But we already know you are talking about people want to be lead so why not vote Republican.

BTW nice to see that you only brought back 1 of your personas this time.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

If you live in a rundown house or mobile home, that is YOUR FAULT, not theirs.

So, a child growing up with parents that live in a mobile home ... the child is to blame?

They are willing to work 60-80 hrs. a week to achieve the goals they have set.

Do we have PROOF they really work that long?
How many hours a week do *I* work, hmmm?

Those of you that I mentioned above, work your 40 hrs. a week and set on the couch drinking beer and watching sports on your bigscreen t.v.

You're the one with the picture next to your screen name that is of a football helmet. Not me.

If you are really upset with the successful people in this world, don't sit around complaining about it, go out and change it. Make yourself one of the successful. Or would you rather not give up your spot on the couch?

You mistake discussing a problem and possible solutions with inaction.