Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
mrplunkey
New member
Yeah, there are a lot of business models out there that aren't impacted by government agencies.
We can't all luck-out and work in a nightclub.
The Reaganomics Fraud:
- Thread starter Mr. dB
- Start date
Yeah, there are a lot of business models out there that aren't impacted by government agencies.
We can't all luck-out and work in a nightclub.
javaguru
Banned
Mitch Daniels privatized the Indiana toll system and it not only decreased costs... it improved efficiency and enriched the public treasurey. I have no problem paying taxes for the public good...including roads... but for profit entities always seem to do it better than the government and cheaper. The GAO released a report... even though Haliburton raped American taxpayers with cost plus accounting it was cheaper than if the U.S. military had filled those roles through their channels.
(1) Way to play the asshole card. Yeah I'm a loser, so what? If my line of work doesn't meet the minimum requirements to qualify for having an opinion, then why do you even bother replying to my thread? Why don't you go hang with the other bigshots, there's plenty of other millionaires on EF with whom you can share a brandy and cigar and have a laugh at the proles.
(B) My point is that if your whole profit structure can't stand up to the occasional unexpected expense, how the heck do you survive? How do your competitors survive? Do the prices of your products and/or services fail to cover operating expenses and a provide tidy profit? Are things so tight that a few big red "STOP" buttons are gonna upset the whole cart?
javaguru
Banned
You are a taxpayer and citizen...your vote matters and I would never belittle your input or intelligence.
However, the corporations do what is required under what the political situation dictates. I already mentioned how Microsoft went from spending $0.00 on lobbying congress to spending hundreds of millions after the anti-trust lawsuit they won...money they could have spent on employing people and innovating as opposed to supporting parasites that produce nothing of value. They now spend outrageous amounts of money as an insurance policy against political backlash. The oil companies make single digit profit margins and they're labeled evil under dems but Apple sells products with a 40% profit margin and nobody cares.
mrplunkey
New member
1) Yeah, I assume you were being smug and I fired back. If your question was legitimate, then I apologize.
2) Our profit structures used to have slack in them to absorb these kinds of hits. The problem is two fold: 1) The hits have gotten steadily greater over the last 20 years while 1) Global competition and pricing efficiency have removed all that slack from the system. It leaves employers with a very dismal set of choices: Offshore, downsize, cut overhead costs, reduce benefits, etc. etc. Employers don't do the things they do because they want to -- it's a miserable process. But typically the same people who yell the loudest when we react to this new environment are the same ones who support the politicians and bureaucrats who created these unlivable conditions in the first place.
I'll post-up another example on this thread... this one is hot off the press!
mrplunkey
New member
I was recently with our regulatory affairs director and asked for an example of the latest FDA crazyness. This one is hot off the press (less than three days old).
Here's the back story:
We do a fairly large amount of chemistry, which means we use a lot of scales. Originally we used scales in the appropriate range (i.e. for measurements in the 20-40g range, we used a 50g scale). That left us with a number of scales and a number of calibration points and procedures (scale calibration procedures vary a little by manufacturer).
A couple of years ago, FDA had problems with the fact that there were so many different scales and procedures. They said we were out of compliance with 21 CFR 820.72(a).
So here's what we did: We bought some incredibly expensive scales, that were dead-flat and precise across a huge range (0g-500g). These things were at least 3x more expensive than normal scales. The beauty was they had three calibration points total: 0, 200g and 400g. So we could use the same standard weights and the same procedure for every scale in the plant, knowing that every scale would be dead-nuts accurate. And it only cost us about $50,0000 -- which is a steal by FDA corrective action standards.
So two years later, we get a different FDA inspector. Here is an cut-and-paste directly out of their report:
So guess what we get to do? Buy scales like we used to use. Yes, this is our government at work.
I can crank-out examples like these on a near daily basis.
Here's the back story:
We do a fairly large amount of chemistry, which means we use a lot of scales. Originally we used scales in the appropriate range (i.e. for measurements in the 20-40g range, we used a 50g scale). That left us with a number of scales and a number of calibration points and procedures (scale calibration procedures vary a little by manufacturer).
A couple of years ago, FDA had problems with the fact that there were so many different scales and procedures. They said we were out of compliance with 21 CFR 820.72(a).
So here's what we did: We bought some incredibly expensive scales, that were dead-flat and precise across a huge range (0g-500g). These things were at least 3x more expensive than normal scales. The beauty was they had three calibration points total: 0, 200g and 400g. So we could use the same standard weights and the same procedure for every scale in the plant, knowing that every scale would be dead-nuts accurate. And it only cost us about $50,0000 -- which is a steal by FDA corrective action standards.
So two years later, we get a different FDA inspector. Here is an cut-and-paste directly out of their report:
So guess what we get to do? Buy scales like we used to use. Yes, this is our government at work.
I can crank-out examples like these on a near daily basis.
Redrocker13
New member
Redrocker13
New member
DB, I work in the auto industry. Have for years. I assure you that what Plunkey is describing is our same experience here. I have also had occasion to closely mingle with managers, ceo's and other captains of industry over the years and their shared experience is remarkably the same. Here's my point...Our federal and state governments try to do far too much, demonstrably beyond their constitutional scope. And a great deal of it is bad attitude. Bad attitude that we the people need these fools to take care of us. Somehow we're not bright enough or resiliant enough to fend for ourselves. And certainly when we are confronted by images of a thousand people stranded on an overpass in New Orleans because they didn't have the moxy or the brains to believe the weather-man and therefore get out of dodge ahead of time, it only helps cement this idea in the minds of politicians willing to take advantage of it. Needs other examples?? No problem.
Freddie and Fannie....We need these 2 institutions because some people can't find a way to maintain a good credit score or appropriately govern their finances so as to afford a home. We see clearly now how well that has worked. And thanks Barney. You truly are brilliant!
Medicare/aid...AND
Social security...We're not able to prepare for our own retirement (and since when is retirement a constitutional right OR a moral expectation?!?!?) and therefore we need the federal government to provide medical care in our old age. So now we have an entire dependent class on our hands costing the american taxpayer several hundred BILLION dollars a year to care for what they themselves should have provided for. I'm surprised it has taken 70 years to catch up to us.
I could keep going and going and going. And please, I mean NO disrespect whatsoever. I actually kinda hope you will start to see the conservative aspect of these issues and think differently when it comes time to vote. We need more of an attitude of rugged individualism and self sufficiency. Yes, people do need help from time to time. But our government is soooooooo far beyond that it's beginning to become incalculable. And this attitude and course will kill the United States. It's only a matter of time.
Freddie and Fannie....We need these 2 institutions because some people can't find a way to maintain a good credit score or appropriately govern their finances so as to afford a home. We see clearly now how well that has worked. And thanks Barney. You truly are brilliant!
Medicare/aid...AND
Social security...We're not able to prepare for our own retirement (and since when is retirement a constitutional right OR a moral expectation?!?!?) and therefore we need the federal government to provide medical care in our old age. So now we have an entire dependent class on our hands costing the american taxpayer several hundred BILLION dollars a year to care for what they themselves should have provided for. I'm surprised it has taken 70 years to catch up to us.
I could keep going and going and going. And please, I mean NO disrespect whatsoever. I actually kinda hope you will start to see the conservative aspect of these issues and think differently when it comes time to vote. We need more of an attitude of rugged individualism and self sufficiency. Yes, people do need help from time to time. But our government is soooooooo far beyond that it's beginning to become incalculable. And this attitude and course will kill the United States. It's only a matter of time.
Why have the tolls gone up over 80% on that road since 2006 if costs have decreased ?
So did these oppressive regulations only hit you during the Clinton and Obama administrations? Or did you have any of these crisis moments during the Regan, Bush41 and Bush43 years too?
My point being do the GOP administrations show any sign of lightening the load of oppressive regulations?
And have you ever tried to express your concerns to your Congressperson or Senator?
Similar threads
