- Joined
- Apr 2, 2007
- Messages
- 797
- Reaction score
- 13
- Points
- 18
- Location
- Merriam, KS
- Your Mac's Specs
- 15" MBP Core Duo 2.0GHz 1.5GB, 20" iMac C2D 2.4GHz 4GB, PowerPC G4 500MHz 512MB
The other car manufactures managed to do stupid things that were thought to be wise through the lens of greed, despite those regulations which "saved" Ford. I don't buy that those regulations saved them. Ford did some serious restructuring prior to the financial collapse to mitigate the impending damage without any guidance from the government.That makes it sound as if Ford operated beyond the boundaries that is regulation. They're success was, and always will be, in part due to regulations which ensure that they don't do stupid things that are thought to be wise through the lens of greed.
But I don't want more than a minimum of regulation. If I asked for excessive regulation at some point previously, it was a typo.The issue here is you are creating a binary in which you have no regulation on one hand and excessive regulation on the other.
Survival of the fittest. It worked pretty darn well for the past, say, 4.5 billion years. You really think we have somehow developed something in the last few thousand years that somehow trumps the work being done by cold, cruel mother nature over all that time. Sympathy only gets in the way of progress. Perfect example: Wolves do not suffer from hip dysplasia. Can you say that about man's best friend? Another example: AIDS resistance in humans is now being documented in northern Africa (less because of sympathy, than because the sympathetic outpouring couldn't treat the disease. Either way, same end result.).And warnings/regulations have never saved anyone from something? You're making a tenuous logical link between the presence of warning labels and personal ignorance. So, is the answer to simply remove all labels? That's a risky game to play that leads to nothing beneficial.
Yes, warnings have saved some people, right up until the next generation grows up and expects warning labels to tell them everything to be careful of... common sense no longer necessary. Have you read the first few pages of a lawnmower's instruction manual? "Caution, blades sharp." "Caution, do not put fingers or toes under mower deck when mower running." "Caution, ..." It's ridiculous, and that's the way everything the government gets a hold of goes. Taxe code? Ha!
Last example... people running red lights. 10-15 years ago when north/southbound traffice got a red light the east/westbound traffic immediately got a green light. This worked fine for quite a while, until people began running red lights. So the length of yellow lights was increased in an effort to increase safety. This worked for a while, then people began running red lights again so a delay was instituted between the change of one direction to red and the counter-direction to green. This again worked for a while, until people realized the delay was present and that they could enter the intersection even just after the light changed and make it through. Now they've increased the delay between light changes even more, and again it worked for a while, until people realized the delay was longer so they'd be even more brazen about running the red light. It's already illegal to enter the intersection after the light has turned red, so what more regulation is needed to fix that problem? Maybe instill more common sense in drivers? Maybe shorten the lights back to how they were and let some people learn a proper lesson? We cannot regulate people into intelligence.
We can keep taking these hop, skips, and jumps to see where we end up, but I'm guessing it'd be a long way from Apple and Amazon by the time we got done! lol I managed to bring up evolution in my reply. I can't wait to see where you take it now.You were talking about the federal credit rating and I responded by talking about financial institutions. It was entirely relevant.