Trump Hits Another Home run at CPAC!

[Fugus]

The policy lets the people who make the regulations choose which to remove. They have to do so within their department. The ones being removed, will be removed by the experts that know them the best. It's not arbitrary, at all. I personally would have said you have to remove 1,000 for every new one, but I'm impatient. I don't think Trump realizes how many there are to remove.

You give them too much credit.

There are two categories you want to look at when it comes to regulations.

You have the regulations that protect the people and the environment and require a certain level of quality. These can be stuff like environmental regulations or safety regulations that keep workers or customers from getting hurt or keeping the company from screwing them over. Theses are regulations you want.

Then you have regulations that protect incumbent companies from competition with increased barriers to entry or blocking them, good examples of this are the monopoly setups for ISPs and other services. These are the ones you want to get rid of.

The whole 2 for 1 deal with regulations does not differentiate between the two groups as I have seen and you are putting faith in these people that they will do their jobs instead of selling it out to the highest bidder as those consumer/environmental protections actually cost those companies money or reduce profits.

You are just as likely, if not more so, to see them pass a fucked up regulation that protects the incumbents and then repeal two regulations that help protect the consumers then you are to see them doing it right with something as bad as this.

Remember, this is an administration where they actively tried to head every program with the worst possible options to dismantle them and sell out the nation, it's people, the environment, and the debt while enriching them in the process. They aren't looking for the best to make this stuff, they actively looked for the worst options to do it.

[Templar 331]

The greater the pride the greater the fall. Though knowing Trump he'll blame the ground for his falling onto it......

"There is no such thing as a 'global flag. I'm not representing the globe, I'm representing your country."

Very poorly....

"We're going to put the regulation industry out of work."

I just love drinking coal water and breathing in smog.

"We will cut wasteful spending.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!!

How much has those vacations cost us already?

We will promote our values. We will rebuild our inner cities."

"We will kick minorities out, bulldoze the slums and build hotels."

"We are going to keep radical Islamic terrorists the hell out of our country."

"By making sure all brown people who I don't owe money to stay out."

'Nobody's gonna mess with us folks.' Says 'no one will dare question' the US

Megalomaniac....
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/megalomania

"It's time for all Americans to get off of welfare and get back to work"

Even though over half of the people on welfare have a job......

[Tijuana]

I, too, like to use Caps Lock to make myself seem bigger on the internet.

I'm trying in caps to use emphasis. If you don't understand that, you are going to have a rough time here. Nobody is acting big by using caps or italics or bold type. "HUR DUR, he use fancy text. He think smarter over me."

[Bodakane]

Name one that IS necessary. Two can play your silly game. Go play it by yourself.

You just picked a fight with a boxer.

29 CFR 1910.157 Portable fire extinguishers.

[Tijuana]

Hahahahahaha. You have no idea what you're talking about.

You've proven it.

What I posted is absolutely how it works.

Do you know that the CFR is? Jesus man. Have the sack to admit you're fucking wrong and then have more sack to actually answer questions asked of you.

I thought Trumpers were supposed to be all about personal responsibility and shit.

OSHA regualtions are get this...regulations. Same with the EPA and DOT. You're literally doubling down on your ignorance here.

I'm perfectly ok with you thinking I am stupid. Unfortunately, it's one of nature's most cruel facts, that only the smart people know who the other smart people are. /shrug

[Eliseus]

Yes, how inspiring. Chest-thumping, xenophobia, and more empty promises.

Should probably go get an education and broaden your vocabulary. Attaching xenophobia to anything you don't like isn't an accurate use of the term. However, you portray xenophobia towards Trump supporters if we want to be more accurate.

[Bodakane]

I'm perfectly ok with you thinking I am stupid. Unfortunately, it's one of nature's most cruel facts, that only the smart people know who the other smart people are. /shrug

I don't think you're stupid. I KNOW you're full of shit on this topic.

Full disclosure, my job is to teach businesses to comply with OSHA, EPA and DOT regulations. I know for a fact that stuff I'm saying is true. You are parroting your dear leader.

- - - Updated - - -

Should probably go get an education and broaden your vocabulary. Attaching xenophobia to anything you don't like isn't an accurate use of the term. However, you portray xenophobia towards Trump supporters if we want to be more accurate.

The Muslim ban and the Mexican wall are xenophobic by defintion. If you don't like the term, the don't support xenophobic policies.

[jackofwind]

In what area? The area of knowing random country's flags? Who gives a shit if I'm uneducated in that area? It serves zero purpose. I wouldn't consider that contributing to an overall level of being uneducated either. I think my master's degree out weighs my lack of flag knowledge.

I hardly think not knowing what a fucking flag looks like would imply someone's knowledge is lacking in any general sense of the phrase.

Apparently you give some form of a shit because it took you getting angry and pissy on the internet to admit that you're uneducated in an area of general knowledge instead of just accepting it and moving on. Meanwhile in your defence of yourself you demonstrated a lack of knowledge in basic definitions: you argued that you were in fact not ignorant or uneducated in the subject matter, when you clearly were.

PS: Your master's degree may or not exist because this is the internet, just as mine may or may not.

I would say that not knowing what a flag looks like demonstrates a definite lack of general knowledge. Can you find Russia on a map, or is that beneath you as well? Do you recognize any flags at all? It's not like Russia is some obscure little country with an odd flag, it's a major global player. Can you name the capital of Australia? These are basic things that people with a highschool diploma could reasonably be expected to know.

Your disdainful attitude regarding something you don't know says far more about you as a person than the thing itself.

[Tijuana]

You give them too much credit.

There are two categories you want to look at when it comes to regulations.

You have the regulations that protect the people and the environment and require a certain level of quality. These can be stuff like environmental regulations or safety regulations that keep workers or customers from getting hurt or keeping the company from screwing them over. Theses are regulations you want.

Then you have regulations that protect incumbent companies from competition with increased barriers to entry or blocking them, good examples of this are the monopoly setups for ISPs and other services. These are the ones you want to get rid of.

The whole 2 for 1 deal with regulations does not differentiate between the two groups as I have seen and you are putting faith in these people that they will do their jobs instead of selling it out to the highest bidder as those consumer/environmental protections actually cost those companies money or reduce profits.

You are just as likely, if not more so, to see them pass a fucked up regulation that protects the incumbents and then repeal two regulations that help protect the consumers then you are to see them doing it right with something as bad as this.

Remember, this is an administration where they actively tried to head every program with the worst possible options to dismantle them and sell out the nation, it's people, the environment, and the debt while enriching them in the process. They aren't looking for the best to make this stuff, they actively looked for the worst options to do it.

I could not disagree more, with the notions that these departments are not bloated, and that it's morally correct for congress to push their regulatory duty upon un-elected bureaucrats.

But, to your core point. Are you actually suggesting, that we cannot trust these bureaucrats to remove the right regulations, yet we can trust them just fine to keep adding the new ones year after year? Are...are you...like...wait...are you serious?

- - - Updated - - -

I never fucking said anyone said that either? What are you on about? I said you'll eventually fucking run out of regulations because 1-2=-1. That is the argument. Where is the fault in that argument?

That the number we are starting with is in the trillions. Sure, we will run out under this plan. But that will be in like year 8798709870, and I don't think Trump will still be around. No doubt, long before then we will be adding them back in.

Incidentally, our pre-existing policy of removing regulations is that we don't have one. We just never remove any of them. Ever. Even when then wreck the economy for no gain.

- - - Updated - - -

You just picked a fight with a boxer.

29 CFR 1910.157 Portable fire extinguishers.

You spelled douche wrong.

[Bodakane]

I could not disagree more, with the notions that these departments are not bloated, and that it's morally correct for congress to push their regulatory duty upon un-elected bureaucrats.

But, to your core point. Are you actually suggesting, that we cannot trust these bureaucrats to remove the right regulations, yet we can trust them just fine to keep adding the new ones year after year? Are...are you...like...wait...are you serious?

You should really stop talking with authority on topics you don't even understand the basic concpets behind, it makes you look completely foolish.

[Sorshen]

regulation is unnecessary - Tijuana 2017

[Eliseus]

The Muslim ban and the Mexican wall are xenophobic by defintion. If you don't like the term, the don't support xenophobic policies.

A Muslim ban doesn't exist. A wall on the US border to deter illegal immigration from the south IS NOT xenophobia by definition.

Prime example of why there is threads about Trump doing something about fake news.

[Bodakane]

You spelled douche wrong.

What did I do that was douchey exactly? Be a relative expert on topic you're less than a novice on? Ask you to back up your bullshit? Answered your question?

During all that, you try to pretned yopu know things you don't, ignore providing any evidence or display of knowledge on the topic and won;t even admit when you're wrong but instead double down on the falsehoods.

Which of those is douchey?

[Tijuana]

I don't think you're stupid. I KNOW you're full of shit on this topic.

Full disclosure, my job is to teach businesses to comply with OSHA, EPA and DOT regulations. I know for a fact that stuff I'm saying is true. You are parroting your dear leader.

- - - Updated - - -



The Muslim ban and the Mexican wall are xenophobic by defintion. If you don't like the term, the don't support xenophobic policies.

Oh, well I see what is going on now. You have professional bias. Well, your thoughts are tainted in this anyway then. Move along...move along....

You are just looking out for your own wallet. That is why you are upset.

[Bodakane]

A Muslim ban doesn't exist. A wall on the US border to deter illegal immigration from the south IS NOT xenophobia by definition.

Prime example of why there is threads about Trump doing something about fake news.

There isn't because the last one was hsot down. but it was promised, tried anmd promised to be tried again.

And yes, a wall on the border is xenophobic, by defintion.

You guys already rewrite facts now you want to rewrite defintions too?

[Orlong]

https://twitter.com/ajplus/status/835205880542982144

Oh boy, this is totally normal behavior from an administration.

Yeah, I would totally trust a tweet from a far left rag run by anarchists and millenials that focuses on SJW topics

[Bodakane]

Oh, well I see what is going on now. You have professional bias. Well, your thoughts are tainted in this anyway then. Move along...move along....

You are just looking out for your own wallet. That is why you are upset.

Typical pussy bullshit.

I hate my job. I can't wait till I don't have to do it anymore. The ONLY reason i keep it, is because it is a family business. The second members of my family are gone, I am too. Your bitchass attempts at deflection are weaker than your knowledge of the subject.

Just admit you don't know what the fuck you're talking about when it comes to regulations. Save some of your self respect.

[jackofwind]

Yeah, I would totally trust a tweet from a far left rag run by anarchists and millenials that focuses on SJW topics

Are you saying that they should be blocked or they aren't being blocked?

[Tijuana]

The number we're starting with is not in the fucking trillions. Fucking christ you have no idea what you're talking about. Do you know how big that number is?

Why do we need a policy that forces we remove regulations? How about we actually just evaluate a regulation and decide if it's needed? How about you do what we've asked 10 times and find ONE SINGLE regulation that you disagree with? If you're going to continue to refuse to do this, then shut the fuck up because you're obviously not interested in any real debate.

Because the bureaucrats that make the rules will think hey are all great. Are you being serious?

There is also the bigger issue that the intention of the framers was for Congress to make regulations, as they did for ~175 years.

- - - Updated - - -

What did I do that was douchey exactly? Be a relative expert on topic you're less than a novice on? Ask you to back up your bullshit? Answered your question?

During all that, you try to pretned yopu know things you don't, ignore providing any evidence or display of knowledge on the topic and won;t even admit when you're wrong but instead double down on the falsehoods.

Which of those is douchey?

You are.

Is this fun for you? It's not very fun for me. I much prefer to discuss things with people who are objective. Sometimes, in speaking with intelligent and objective people, I change my mind about something. I absolutely delight when that happens. I doubt you can make that happen for me, due to your extreme bias.

- - - Updated - - -

This is just pathetic. You sit there and claim he's wrong and when he tells you it's his fucking job to know this shit instead of admitting that maybe it's you who doesn't know what the fuck you're talking about you call him bias?

Still waiting on that one single example of a regulation you disagree with.

I doubt you can pick one that I DO agree with, unless it's about safety, which is EXEMPT from the Trump 2 for 1 rule.

[Bodakane]

You are.

Is this fun for you? It's not very fun for me. I much prefer to discuss things with people who are objective. Sometimes, in speaking with intelligent and objective people, I change my mind about something. I absolutely delight when that happens. I doubt you can make that happen for me, due to your extreme bias.

How have you been objective? You don't even know what regulations are. You are literally lying now.