Reddit mentions of Government Bullies: How Everyday Americans are Being Harassed, Abused, and Imprisoned by the Feds

>> Do you want to cut environment laws to save a few bucks.

>The EPA and BLM (Bureau of Land Management) seem out of control. This was an interesting and enlightening read: https://www.amazon.com/Government-Bullies-Everyday-Americans-Imprisoned/dp/1455522775

You are right about zoning laws but that is the cause of not putting industrial or certain housing into other communities, and people trying to control their neighbourhoods, those rules start out that way and then end up catching other people leading to more complicated laws. Though I am less knowledgeable about the BLM. I also wonder though which exact rules.

The EPA is really hard to say, but it depends on what law, have not read into it the exact rules that people want struck down or regulation decreased. But they are the reason they exist is that you can't just build whatever you want whenever you want. Also making sure things run in for the best case of public health and the countries environment. The problem is two competing approaches, one is NIMBY who force regulations and second is gutting it in places that matter leading to issue like Flint etc. Their focus has been messed with needs organizational restructure not gutting. Also they are responsible of making sure that companies comply with air pollutant contents, water pollutant contents, waste etc. Also protecting certain habitats in America, that personally I would rather see live on than be bulldozed. There are some that are crazy that you can wonder why, but those are usually due to laws for one issue ending up expanding into something else.

>> Remove labour laws to allow corporations to have a stronger control over their employees.

>I don't subscribe to the need for extensive labor laws. As long as people are not compelled (slave labor) it's just another voluntary trade. With the information we now have at our fingertips, IMO, the risk of abuse is much lower than it may have been at one time. The ad-hoc economy that seems to be popping up (Uber/Lyft/AirBnB/Private Amazon Delivery) seems to be another indicator that there will be many opportunities to essentially work for yourself.

Those are horrible jobs. People who use Uber make less than an average taxi driver. It is a good secondary income, but should never be considered primary. And Airbnb is horrible, one crazy party and you are stuck with huge insurance claim. One death and good luck with even being able to rent it out in a year. An accident and you could be liable for huge damages. There is a reason why hotels have regulations. It's also takes away alot of bargaining power from employees. For example if an employee gets injured at work can he sue if he is forced to sign an agreement that the company is not liable for injuries. Another issue is trying to control worker hours to make sure you don't end up forcing people to work crazy hours. Most of these rules are created to help people working under big business but end up expanding to small business. Which to be honest are some of the worst offenders, by making people do work without the required equipment. Etc.

>> Honestly if benefits could be offloaded to the government in a universal sustem like universal healthcare based on the taxes on income and letting stares decide the way they want it to function, it removes another cost to businesses and simplifies the healthcare issue.

>I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Have you ever dealt with medicaid, medicare or social security? I think the answer is again with private industry not government. Where I do agree is decoupling health insurance from employment. I think a compelling argument can be made that private industry can provide catastrophic insurance (much less expensive than today's plans) and people can save and pay for their own health care or purchase a gap insurance. I'd like to see how a less molested market affects the pricing of care and drugs.

>Preexisting conditions is the nut I think no one has been able to crack as the safety net eliminates the need for paying anything until you are diagnosed. The state answer seems to be to force everyone to pay, even the young and healthy. I disagree with the government compelling action like this.

The issue is you have three bodies, that are not only dealing with themselves but with the private industry. Healthcare insurance is for profit. You remove profit you take away a huge chunk of spending. Healthcare insurance should not be as big of an industry. Germany has a public private hybrid but it is only the hospital's or medical facilities that can be private. Canada has a public system and their overall cost per patient is less than in America. The main reasoning can easily be attributed to early detection, which when people don't have to worry if they are covered or not or its cost can get done. For me it's maslow's triangle, take away a necessity and the person can focus on something else and better themselves.

>At a fundamental level I view government as mostly unnecessary in everyday affairs. For those that feel uncomfortable at the thought I can relate the this best via analogy. There are big differences between ebay and craigslist. Both have differing control and feedback mechanisms yet both can be used safely by taking different types of precautions. Users know the relative risks and consequences of craigslist (no reputation to rely on, potential shady characters, no refunds) and adapt to those risks for the opportunity and/or the savings. Ebay may make people feel more secure, but you're paying for that security and it is by no means required, nor is it inherently unsafe to use craigslist, just requires different behavior. The flaw in the analogy is that ebay's services are generally not priced ridiculously and they are held to a standard of profitability while the government has no such standard and waste and graft is everywhere.

Big government for me is different from many other ways, I believe in the constant updating of the laws, but needs to be focused on is less control on people's personal lives like surveillance and certain rules. Yes it has expanded in many ways but neither government will ever decrease it. They just have their own version of big government they shove on people.

Also eBay and Craigslist are not a good example of managing a country. As both have very different goals. One is for profit and one is management of a country. I mean if you want to see a profitable country look at Singapore and Dubai. They have giant governments yet are really profitable. So was UK and Switzerland. They have a bigger role on citizen lives than the US has.

For me smaller government is decreasing inconvenience but also removing as much of the issues about necessities or how to pay for everything by alleviating costs and letting people focus on taking risks like starting a business etc.


>Re: the prison industrial complex, I share your concern but can't suggest I know enough about the details to offer any value. Intuitively it seems there's massive potential for corruption. And the incarceration rate seems strangely high. Perhaps having less laws to break would be a good start.

> Do you want to cut environment laws to save a few bucks.

The EPA and BLM (Bureau of Land Management) seem out of control. This was an interesting and enlightening read: https://www.amazon.com/Government-Bullies-Everyday-Americans-Imprisoned/dp/1455522775

> Remove labour laws to allow corporations to have a stronger control over their employees.

I don't subscribe to the need for extensive labor laws. As long as people are not compelled (slave labor) it's just another voluntary trade. With the information we now have at our fingertips, IMO, the risk of abuse is much lower than it may have been at one time. The ad-hoc economy that seems to be popping up (Uber/Lyft/AirBnB/Private Amazon Delivery) seems to be another indicator that there will be many opportunities to essentially work for yourself.

> Honestly if benefits could be offloaded to the government in a universal sustem like universal healthcare based on the taxes on income and letting stares decide the way they want it to function, it removes another cost to businesses and simplifies the healthcare issue.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Have you ever dealt with medicaid, medicare or social security? I think the answer is again with private industry not government. Where I do agree is decoupling health insurance from employment. I think a compelling argument can be made that private industry can provide catastrophic insurance (much less expensive than today's plans) and people can save and pay for their own health care or purchase a gap insurance. I'd like to see how a less molested market affects the pricing of care and drugs.

Preexisting conditions is the nut I think no one has been able to crack as the safety net eliminates the need for paying anything until you are diagnosed. The state answer seems to be to force everyone to pay, even the young and healthy. I disagree with the government compelling action like this.

At a fundamental level I view government as mostly unnecessary in everyday affairs. For those that feel uncomfortable at the thought I can relate the this best via analogy. There are big differences between ebay and craigslist. Both have differing control and feedback mechanisms yet both can be used safely by taking different types of precautions. Users know the relative risks and consequences of craigslist (no reputation to rely on, potential shady characters, no refunds) and adapt to those risks for the opportunity and/or the savings. Ebay may make people feel more secure, but you're paying for that security and it is by no means required, nor is it inherently unsafe to use craigslist, just requires different behavior. The flaw in the analogy is that ebay's services are generally not priced ridiculously and they are held to a standard of profitability while the government has no such standard and waste and graft is everywhere.

Re: the prison industrial complex, I share your concern but can't suggest I know enough about the details to offer any value. Intuitively it seems there's massive potential for corruption. And the incarceration rate seems strangely high. Perhaps having less laws to break would be a good start.