Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Regulations and Peanut Butter with Rat Feces

jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Furthermore, I am a bit confused because Citrayakah seems to know that it is bad to eat peanut butter with rat feces, but he still claims that he would eat it if regulations making that illegal didn't exist.

Very confusing. But, I am just worried about Citrayakah because I'm worried about what he will do if he finds out its not actually illegal to mix rat feces with peanut butter and eat it. We all need to watch out for him.
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 10:05:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 9:59:13 PM, Wnope wrote:
So...are you trying to appear like an idiot strawmanning someones' point for no good reason or is that unintentional?

If only this were a strawman.

The sad reality is that many pro regulation arguments really are this stupid.
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 10:10:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Very funny. But let's just say that it won't necessarily be immediately obvious that the crunchy bits aren't peanuts...
imabench
Posts: 21,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.

Furthermore, I am a bit confused because Citrayakah seems to know that it is bad to eat peanut butter with rat feces, but he still claims that he would eat it if regulations making that illegal didn't exist.

Very confusing. But, I am just worried about Citrayakah because I'm worried about what he will do if he finds out its not actually illegal to mix rat feces with peanut butter and eat it. We all need to watch out for him.

This is what Romney's fanbase consists of ^
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.

I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


Furthermore, I am a bit confused because Citrayakah seems to know that it is bad to eat peanut butter with rat feces, but he still claims that he would eat it if regulations making that illegal didn't exist.

Very confusing. But, I am just worried about Citrayakah because I'm worried about what he will do if he finds out its not actually illegal to mix rat feces with peanut butter and eat it. We all need to watch out for him.

This is what the the statist fanbase consists of ^

Fix'd
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 10:21:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
BTW.

I'm curious why you seem to think companies that make peanut butter would want to put rat feces in their products.

I just don't see how they benefit from doing that. It would actually really hurt their business, unless people really wanted rat feces in their peanut butter.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 10:22:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.


I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


can't light a limp wet match.

No but really, companies would. Just like how walmart (and most stores) enjoy taking food with expired labels and put new labels over them with new expiration dates.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 10:25:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 10:22:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.


I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


can't light a limp wet match.


No but really, companies would. Just like how walmart (and most stores) enjoy taking food with expired labels and put new labels over them with new expiration dates.

I thought we were talking about rat feces not food being sold slightly past their expiration date.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 10:28:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 10:25:29 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:22:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.


I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


can't light a limp wet match.


No but really, companies would. Just like how walmart (and most stores) enjoy taking food with expired labels and put new labels over them with new expiration dates.

I thought we were talking about rat feces not food being sold slightly past their expiration date.

Same basic concepts. Both are about companies cutting corners at the expense of the safety of their own customers. What the customer doesn't know, wont hurt the company.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 10:40:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.

The only thing I would agree with in terms of what should be there is needing to provide a list of ingredients, to reduce the threat of deception. Frankly, if someone is stupid enough to buy something that has rat feces in it and is listed (per regulation), then that's on them.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 11:02:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 10:28:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:25:29 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:22:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.


I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


can't light a limp wet match.


No but really, companies would. Just like how walmart (and most stores) enjoy taking food with expired labels and put new labels over them with new expiration dates.

I thought we were talking about rat feces not food being sold slightly past their expiration date.

Same basic concepts. Both are about companies cutting corners at the expense of the safety of their own customers. What the customer doesn't know, wont hurt the company.

But if the customer does find out it does hurt the company.

And, there is real money to be made for private companies (or rating agencies) that give information on other companies.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 2:13:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 11:02:02 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:28:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:25:29 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:22:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.


I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


can't light a limp wet match.


No but really, companies would. Just like how walmart (and most stores) enjoy taking food with expired labels and put new labels over them with new expiration dates.

I thought we were talking about rat feces not food being sold slightly past their expiration date.

Same basic concepts. Both are about companies cutting corners at the expense of the safety of their own customers. What the customer doesn't know, wont hurt the company.


But if the customer does find out it does hurt the company.

And, there is real money to be made for private companies (or rating agencies) that give information on other companies.

Where is this "real money" coming from?
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 8:13:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
No, there's "real money" in pretending to do so. You can charge higher rates because YOURS is the clean one (even though it isn't), so you're inclined to pay the voluntary regulators more. And thanks to the companies' race to the bottom, you're unlikely to be ratted out by your competition, who'll be doing the same thing.

Do you know anything about the history of regulation in this country? It's not like the push to regulate products and ingredients came from nowhere. It came from the specific failure of what you're implying will happen to happen.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 11:50:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 10:21:26 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
BTW.

I'm curious why you seem to think companies that make peanut butter would want to put rat feces in their products.

I just don't see how they benefit from doing that. It would actually really hurt their business, unless people really wanted rat feces in their peanut butter.

It's less 'want to put rat feces in peanut butter' and more 'don't care if rat feces are in peanut butter'.

And if the rat feces got mixed in with the peanuts before processing, it wouldn't necessarily be obvious.
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 1:40:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 11:02:02 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:28:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:25:29 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:22:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.


I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


can't light a limp wet match.


No but really, companies would. Just like how walmart (and most stores) enjoy taking food with expired labels and put new labels over them with new expiration dates.

I thought we were talking about rat feces not food being sold slightly past their expiration date.

Same basic concepts. Both are about companies cutting corners at the expense of the safety of their own customers. What the customer doesn't know, wont hurt the company.


But if the customer does find out it does hurt the company.

And, there is real money to be made for private companies (or rating agencies) that give information on other companies.

And how much damage will be done before the customers find out? How much money will they make?

Note that without regulations, a prosecution would have to prove intent to claim any damages against a company that was found to be doing any of this. Would those who didn't know just be screwed? Would the company be accountable for the damage their ignorance has caused?

What if there are no alternatives? What if my local water company has been found to have dirty water? Is the free market going to make another water company spring up and run pipelines to each and every house served by that water company? If so, how long will that take? How long will I have to drink dirty water? Is it my fault that I have dirty water as my only option?

Whether you like it or not, regulation is necessary for situations like this.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 4:18:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/17/2013 2:13:47 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/16/2013 11:02:02 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:28:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:25:29 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:22:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.


I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


can't light a limp wet match.


No but really, companies would. Just like how walmart (and most stores) enjoy taking food with expired labels and put new labels over them with new expiration dates.

I thought we were talking about rat feces not food being sold slightly past their expiration date.

Same basic concepts. Both are about companies cutting corners at the expense of the safety of their own customers. What the customer doesn't know, wont hurt the company.


But if the customer does find out it does hurt the company.

And, there is real money to be made for private companies (or rating agencies) that give information on other companies.

Where is this "real money" coming from?

Customers who want to know how safe the food they eat is.
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 4:19:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/17/2013 8:13:17 AM, bladerunner060 wrote:
No, there's "real money" in pretending to do so. You can charge higher rates because YOURS is the clean one (even though it isn't), so you're inclined to pay the voluntary regulators more. And thanks to the companies' race to the bottom, you're unlikely to be ratted out by your competition, who'll be doing the same thing.

Do you know anything about the history of regulation in this country? It's not like the push to regulate products and ingredients came from nowhere. It came from the specific failure of what you're implying will happen to happen.

No. It came from existing companies wanting to stomp out competition.

The regulations did not improve food or health safety.
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 4:21:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/17/2013 11:50:25 AM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:21:26 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
BTW.

I'm curious why you seem to think companies that make peanut butter would want to put rat feces in their products.

I just don't see how they benefit from doing that. It would actually really hurt their business, unless people really wanted rat feces in their peanut butter.

It's less 'want to put rat feces in peanut butter' and more 'don't care if rat feces are in peanut butter'.

And if the rat feces got mixed in with the peanuts before processing, it wouldn't necessarily be obvious.

Again. People don't want food with rat feces. And, if they care enough about the amount of rat fecal material in their peanut butter, there is a demand for private rating agencies.
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 4:22:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/17/2013 1:40:08 PM, drhead wrote:
At 7/16/2013 11:02:02 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:28:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:25:29 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:22:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.


I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


can't light a limp wet match.


No but really, companies would. Just like how walmart (and most stores) enjoy taking food with expired labels and put new labels over them with new expiration dates.

I thought we were talking about rat feces not food being sold slightly past their expiration date.

Same basic concepts. Both are about companies cutting corners at the expense of the safety of their own customers. What the customer doesn't know, wont hurt the company.


But if the customer does find out it does hurt the company.

And, there is real money to be made for private companies (or rating agencies) that give information on other companies.

And how much damage will be done before the customers find out? How much money will they make?

Note that without regulations, a prosecution would have to prove intent to claim any damages against a company that was found to be doing any of this. Would those who didn't know just be screwed? Would the company be accountable for the damage their ignorance has caused?

What if there are no alternatives? What if my local water company has been found to have dirty water? Is the free market going to make another water company spring up and run pipelines to each and every house served by that water company? If so, how long will that take? How long will I have to drink dirty water? Is it my fault that I have dirty water as my only option?

Whether you like it or not, regulation is necessary for situations like this.

Please prove to me that regulations actually fix ANY of these stated problems

The BoP is on the people claiming regulations do all this good not the opposing.
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 4:45:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/17/2013 4:21:07 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Again. People don't want food with rat feces. And, if they care enough about the amount of rat fecal material in their peanut butter, there is a demand for private rating agencies.

And if they are for-profit, then they are vulnerable to corruption. For that matter, the same is true of non-profits. There have been conflicts of interest in groups like the Sierra Club, for instance.
jimtimmy2
Posts: 403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 5:01:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/17/2013 4:45:55 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/17/2013 4:21:07 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Again. People don't want food with rat feces. And, if they care enough about the amount of rat fecal material in their peanut butter, there is a demand for private rating agencies.

And if they are for-profit, then they are vulnerable to corruption. For that matter, the same is true of non-profits. There have been conflicts of interest in groups like the Sierra Club, for instance.

Corruption is MUCH worse in the government
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 5:16:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/17/2013 4:22:20 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/17/2013 1:40:08 PM, drhead wrote:
At 7/16/2013 11:02:02 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:28:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:25:29 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:22:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:19:40 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/16/2013 10:16:28 PM, imabench wrote:
At 7/16/2013 9:38:09 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
Myself and Citrakayah recently had an exchange about regulations where I was skeptical of his claim that state regulations increased public safety.

Citrakayah responded:

"Oh, you mean the regulations we have that prevent rat feces from being in my peanut butter?"

Apparently I was under the assumption that the vast majority of people are smart enough to know that they shouldn't eat peanut butter with rat feces in it.

But, apparently, Citrayakah needs to have state regulations to keep him from eating peanut butter with rat feces.

Jimtimmy youre retarded.... The reason that businesses have to list the ingredients that are in the products they sell to the public on the container and the reason why they dont put rat feces in the stuff they sell is precisely BECAUSE state regulations mandate that they have to. Without them then companies would be free to put rat sh*t in their products, not tell people whats in it, and then sell it to the public anyways.


I'm free to set my dick on fire, but I still don't do it.


can't light a limp wet match.


No but really, companies would. Just like how walmart (and most stores) enjoy taking food with expired labels and put new labels over them with new expiration dates.

I thought we were talking about rat feces not food being sold slightly past their expiration date.

Same basic concepts. Both are about companies cutting corners at the expense of the safety of their own customers. What the customer doesn't know, wont hurt the company.


But if the customer does find out it does hurt the company.

And, there is real money to be made for private companies (or rating agencies) that give information on other companies.

And how much damage will be done before the customers find out? How much money will they make?

Note that without regulations, a prosecution would have to prove intent to claim any damages against a company that was found to be doing any of this. Would those who didn't know just be screwed? Would the company be accountable for the damage their ignorance has caused?

What if there are no alternatives? What if my local water company has been found to have dirty water? Is the free market going to make another water company spring up and run pipelines to each and every house served by that water company? If so, how long will that take? How long will I have to drink dirty water? Is it my fault that I have dirty water as my only option?

Whether you like it or not, regulation is necessary for situations like this.



Please prove to me that regulations actually fix ANY of these stated problems

The BoP is on the people claiming regulations do all this good not the opposing.

They fix these problems by making companies liable for these things. It is NOT under dispute that without regulations, companies are not liable for such damages unless intent can be proven.

To provide proof that regulations FIX problems, I only need to point to the Cuyahoga River fires. The Cuyahoga River was once one of the most polluted rivers in the United States, and it was infamous for catching on fire on several occasions. In response to the last fire on Cuyahoga on June 22, 1969, the EPA was formed. The water quality has improved greatly since then, and there have been no fires since then.

Do you understand game theory? If you do, you'll be familiar with the prisoner's dilemma. It applies here because, while every company will benefit from having a clean environment, but the immediate benefits of not cleaning up your own messes are much greater in the short-term. Since we clearly can't trust people to choose to clean up the messes they make, we have to make them do so.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2013 5:19:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/17/2013 4:19:48 PM, jimtimmy2 wrote:
At 7/17/2013 8:13:17 AM, bladerunner060 wrote:
No, there's "real money" in pretending to do so. You can charge higher rates because YOURS is the clean one (even though it isn't), so you're inclined to pay the voluntary regulators more. And thanks to the companies' race to the bottom, you're unlikely to be ratted out by your competition, who'll be doing the same thing.

Do you know anything about the history of regulation in this country? It's not like the push to regulate products and ingredients came from nowhere. It came from the specific failure of what you're implying will happen to happen.

No. It came from existing companies wanting to stomp out competition.

The regulations did not improve food or health safety.

What, competition from people who allow rats to sh*t in their peanut butter to reduce costs?
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian