Tal. It's your simplistic retort doesn't wash. What this really means is that the vendors will have to pay up to the right inspector . What it won't do is improve the quality of the food . What it will do is force some of these vendors out of business... which is what the sit down restaurants want anyway.

Until you get specific Tom, and stop sighting the broad regulations, then what do you expect but a simple retort?

Science and facts is something we can look into, not ways to eliminate the competition. That's what consumers do, make choice about who to spend their money on.

I believe in rules or regulations, but which ones are you saying stops YOU from making money and why? And I think business has an input, but NOT the final say, nor be responsible for application, or oversight, because that ALWAYS means NO accountability, and NO responsibility when something does go wrong.

Let me be specific then. When Palin says drill baby drill, did she make anybody clean up a 20 year old environmental mess from Valdez when she was governor?? Its still screwed up!!

Umm Palin directed her AG to file and amicus in favor of the Valdez victims . SCOTUS decided in favor of them in 2008 while she was still Guv.

The oceans great ability to clean up biodegradable material on it's own along with some human intervention has cleaned up most of Prince William Sound . Oh I'm sure there is still some residue but you could hardly call it "screwed up" . It is recovering .

Exxon Valdez Anniversary: 20 Years Later, Oil Remains

Exxon has requested ,through FOIA ,the results of studies done by the government on the impact of the spill . Both the EPA and the Dept of Commerce have refused to release them . Why ? What are they trying to hide from Exxon ?

Now what does any of this prove? That it's unsafe to transport oil by ship ? Well then it seems to me that a pipeline would be the solution... no ? Or are you in favor of just stopping all oil production and transportation world wide ? I think that is what you long for .Maybe humans should just find a cave to live in and go back to eating moss and insects .

Are you raving again? Tom. Mention a disaster and you go into overdrive. Go worship at altar of BIG OIL of you wish but spare us the diatribe

I'll take it then that you want to heat your home and drive your car with kangaroo dung .

Why can't we use science and technology to to make these things safe and effective, as well as efficient? Less profits, but a better bang for the buck. Start with scrutiny of plans for oil spills, or accidents, BEFORE we allow for the operation to take place. I man a real plan, based on science and resources, not a power point presentation, or a million dollar valve that they proved didn't work before the bought it. Or a simple as keeping a drunk captain from behind the wheel.

The same thing applies for banking and washing dishes. Even in a free market, capitalistic society, rules and procedure, need not be compromised for a few extra bucks. Foxes are lousy watch dogs for hen houses, so why trust them?

You can't plan for the unknown. Hulls of tankers have been double lined since Valdez. The valve was not up to standards and there was clear neglegence from both BP and the regulators who allowed it. I've written a lot about how it was in fact the abandonment of lending standards dictated by the regulators that led to the banking crisis.
I refuse to let you paint us as being proponents of no regulations . Being opposed to Over regulation is to favor the elimination of stupid and unnecessary regulations .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I'll take it then that you want to heat your home and drive your car with kangaroo dung .

---

We don't rely on Alaskan oil Tom in fact we use Coal, you know deep green, directly and as a source of gas and have our own oil wells where oil is piped to the mainland, so we are a little further ahead than you think. Sadly there are not enough Kangaroos in the world for us to experiment with kangaroo dung but when the oil and gas run out we can use Uranium.

This administration has been doing just that while he strengthen and added others.

Don't take it personally when I repeat what the right keeps saying, because rules and policies are NEVER articulated, or explained, just complained about, so what should I do? Take the rights word for it? Heck I don't take the lefts word for anything either. I research it myself.

We can complain about differences but we also have to acknowledge similarity. You ain't that far right Tom, and that's the problem, I doubt you would be seen as a true republican by those in your party.

Look, I know when things don't work out, and accidents happen but there is enough blame to go around to everyone. That's why BP is suing Haliburton now.

Hello again,

Here's a specific regulation we can talk about...

There's this industry called the for profit college industry... It includes the ones who train dental assistants, and massage therapists. Their students are eligible for student loans too.

The problem is, the colleges are lying to students about their job prospects and they're reneging on the promise that they would HELP students get jobs... The industry produces SCHLOCK education, NO jobs, and costs taxpayers BILLIONS...

Obama wanted to REGULATE them to the degree that if they DIDN'T stop lying to their students, they'd lose their student loan eligibility.

Personally, although these regulations MIGHT cause some LOUSY schools to close, and MIGHT cause some people to lose their jobs, it would STILL be a regulation that I would support.

But, the lobbyists won, and the TAXPAYERS lost.. I have NO idea why this would make Republicans happy.

excon

What's you problem Ex if these schools close, we had heaps of this sort of operation in cooking, security, hairdressing and a number of other lines of employment, mainly trapping international students. We had no problem shutting them down and our student intake dropped 100,000 a year. Who knows where they went, USA I guess

I guess the elite Ivy League schools the President hails from always lives up to their promises. I am certain the multitude of state run institutions that get mega bucks from the government do not.

I am familiar with both institutions that are cited in the article... U of Phoenix ,and Kaplan .

The U of Phoenix provides online course work ,their degrees are credible and legit .

Scores of students coming from under preforming public school systems have benefitted from tutoring from the Kaplan system . The before and after SAT scores are proof of that .

My own opinion is that I favor less overall aid to college systems . It horribly distorts tuition fees . Without all the assistance I am sure tuition costs would drop and innovative schools like the U of Phoenix would prosper .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

what's you problem Ex if these schools close, we had heaps of this sort of operation in cooking, security, hairdressing and a number of other lines of employment, mainly trapping international students. We had no problem shutting them down and our student intake dropped 100,000 a year. Who knows where they went, USA I guess

---

Throwing the baby out with the bath water?

Quote:

---

Quote by Tom,
My own opinion is that I favor less overall aid to college systems . It horribly distorts tuition fees . Without all the assistance I am sure tuition costs would drop and innovative schools like the U of Phoenix would prosper .

---

It's the students who need the assistance , but some oversight would be nice to rein in the fees they charge. While I agree that its an excellent system to be trained in something where there are job opportunities, the best ones partner with businesses and corporations to not only provide employment services, but a credible curriculum that meets the needs of the businesses that support them.

But a lot are popping up around the country that rip off students that haven't researched where they apply to. They are not just viable options for young people, but a lot of older ones who want something better than the job they have.

Its like anything else that turns a buck, somebody will always try to game the system, one way or another. Heck, if banks and businesses can make a profit when there are no rules or regulations strong enough, or smart enough, to stop them, what makes us think a teacher won't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Throwing the baby out with the bath water?

---

No just throwing the shoonks and people who charge big money for student visa applications out of the system

Ahh, seems we have the same thing going here as we have many businesses that are trying to get increases in visa application approvals for talent they swear they can't find here.

First it was Americans don't want to do the work that immigrants do (cheaper, I might add), now its Americans aren't smart enough for the jobs they have to fill.

Wonder what's next?

You can't find the talent because you need a diploma to do a meniel job the answer lies in changing the structure of the high school system so it becomes oriented to pre-skilling at least part of the future work force.

What's next is you will invent a way of the computers doing all the work and the population will play video games all day, oh wait, that day has already arrived, what's next might be depopulation

The problem is selective education, along class lines. While technology has made the need for less humans for specific work, it has opened up more need for the technical training to understand and function in a more technical society. Video games are but a tool of that reality, and a fundamental training venue. Look at the way the need for more Doctors, nurses, and technicians has grown in the health care field.

That but a small example of the areas where computer skills are needed, and a diploma is but a start. If you look at it that way you would see that there is more opportunity, than people to do what's necessary to have an efficiently progressive evolving society.

Until we refine the business model to reflect that evolution, and use more people working less hours, we cannot achieve that efficientcy, and must have a nanny state that grows, as economic circulation is cut off from parts of the population.

Eliminating those parts, as they do in China, is in my opinion, not the way to go. Nor is restricting reproductive alternatives, or choices of part of the population that needs it the most.

Well Tal you won't get employers signing on to more people working less hours, what they want is less people working more hours. Computers have made some more productive usually at the expense of lower end jobs.

So you think we should all be tech jocks but then no one wants to do the other work, so you have to be selective about who you train and for what. I know it's not democratic but it isn't a perfect world, there are some who have to be s**t kickers, even if you call them sanitary engineers but if we pay well for meniel tasks then more will want to do them, sort of turns the ideas around, instead of paying CEOs millions we should pay them no more that the lowest paid in their organisation. We would see a lot of better paid jobs very quickly and a very selective selection process. No dills allowed

What your society did was create the situation in China, you exported all the meniel tasks and expected to keep all the high paid interesting jobs. It didn't work because other people are smart too. The Chinese were smart, they got the work and used it to transform their economy, Soon there will be more chinese millionaires than there are in the US and they will be looking for someone to do the low end work Keep your eye on Africa