bobevenson wrote:The following is from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission:
"Guidelines and Requirements for Mandatory Recall Notices
This rule contains CPSC’s interpretation of the information that must appear on mandatory recall notices as well as guidelines for additional information that CPSC or a court can order to be included in these notices."
What part of the word "mandatory" don't you understand?
Which part don't you understand of what is being described by a 'mandatory recall notice'? Let me help you, the mandatory applies to the recall notice and is designed to make the issued notice stand-out from other junk mail. It is not that the recall has been governmentally mandated. The internet is a powerful tool but not for loons who just goggle and cut/paste without reading.
What the hell do you think a "mandatory recall notice" means? Go back to school and learn the nuances of the English language. To help you out a little, when the government says something is mandatory, it means mandatory, no ifs, ands or buts, and it takes legal action against you if you don't comply!
WASHIINGTON, D.C. -- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) unanimously approved a new rule setting guidelines and requirements for information in mandatory recall notices. A mandatory recall can be ordered by the Commission or a U.S. District Court.
This is my house. When people come into my house, I expect them to keep their feet off the furniture and refrain from harassing the dog. If they fail to obey those simple rules, I don't invite them back to my house.
That road outside was built by the government, with the citizens' taxes, for the citizens' use. The government expects citizens to use that road according to a set of agreed-upon rules. If they fail to do so, they will be invited to stay off the government's road.
Well, besides the only proper function of government being social integration, and that government should not own, operate, support or promote anything, please support your point about roads by providing a specific example.
bobevenson wrote:A market is when a buyer and seller get together to buy and sell something at an agreed upon price. It can be as large at the New York Stock Exchange or as small as buying an automobile from somebody. In the case of the New York Stock Exchange, what is being bought and sold has no intrinsic market value, while in the case of the automobile, what is being bought and sold does.
The getting together of people is tightly regulated despite appearances. All regulation costs money. There is no such thing as the "free market".
A person who is falsely arrested and/or prosecuted (where you are not free to go, or are actually thrown into the slammer) will be entitled to an automatic schedule of reparations based on the total circumstances of the case. Furthermore, a person who is arrested must be immediately furnished with an attorney at no charge, who must be present during any questioning by the police.
Dalek Prime wrote:Leo. According to Bob, protecting you from lawless morons is the definition of the nanny state, and he's against that.
Please explain to me why wanting to pick up fares in my car makes me a lawless moron. I'm not breaking any laws, I'm just saying there should not be laws to prevent me from doing it. And as far as being a moron, I believe you qualify for not being able to understanding this.
I didnt say there you are a lawless moron, Bob. We are talking in general about people who do whatever they please. I even said you could sign up with Uber taxi, and start making money.
Dalek Prime wrote:Leo. According to Bob, protecting you from lawless morons is the definition of the nanny state, and he's against that.
Please explain to me why wanting to pick up fares in my car makes me a lawless moron. I'm not breaking any laws, I'm just saying there should not be laws to prevent me from doing it. And as far as being a moron, I believe you qualify for not being able to understanding this.
I didnt say there you are a lawless moron, Bob. We are talking in general about people who do whatever they please. I even said you could sign up with Uber taxi, and start making money.
A) Why should I have to sign up with anybody? I want to pick up whomever I please, whenever I please, and keep all the money.
B) Why shouldn't people be able to do whatever they please as long as they're not interfering with other people?
bobevenson wrote:Well, besides the only proper function of government being social integration, and that government should not own, operate, support or promote anything, please support your point about roads by providing a specific example.
You do know that roads are not a product of spontaneous generation, right? So, if they were all privately built and owned, you'd have to obey different idiosyncratic rules for each one, as well as pay toll.
bobevenson wrote:
A) Why should I have to sign up with anybody? I want to pick up whomever I please, whenever I please, and keep all the money.
B) Why shouldn't people be able to do whatever they please as long as they're not interfering with other people?[/size][/b]
A) Because you'd get more fares with Uber. Its in your interest.
B) Because you only assume you are not interfering with people, when you actually are.
A) Look, don't tell me how to operate my business. I'm not interested in following somebody else's rules.
B) If people are interfering with other people, that's the function of government, to set rules to keep them from running Into each other. How many times to I have to hammer this shit into your head?
