New name for it is irrelevant.....

[cotman03]

SPCC....gonna cost me at least $30K starting within the next two weeks.  Look it up if you don't know what it is.  It will cost farmers billions for maybe a few million in potential damage.  There are many serious proposals coming out of EPA, where SPCC comes from, that could mean EPA tells us how much fertilizer we can apply to our fields, under new interpretations of the Clean Water Act.  Environmentalists are pushing this through the court system.  Tier 4 engines cost around 7-10K more than tier 3 because of extra air cleaning components.  On many tier 3 engines, the air that the engines emit from the exhaust is cleaner than the air taken in at the air intake.  What good does it do to to do more than that?  It has been done though.  There are several others, including requiring permits to apply pesticides around almost all bodies of water in the country, again through the Clean Water Act.  All these are from EPA, where alot of the global warming regs will come from, probably under new interpretations of the Clean Air Act.  I can go on all day if you want.  I am not asleep.  Far from it. 

[KNAPPer]

I congratulate you for being to actually articulate some problems with regulations. Most conservatives are unable to do that. Just look at 3020 - he couldn't even respond. 

I often wonder whether or not right wingers or even moderates ever see this as a problem. We often hear (actually more than often) politicians and conservative supporters say, "We need less regulation," or more often, "Regulations are hurting business." Actually, I agree. Starting a business is far too tied up in regulation to be something that is easy to do and that hurts job creation.

But here is my point: It is not enough to say that Regulations are hurting business. In order to get something done, conservatives need to identify the top problems and be specific. What can not be identified can not be fought and what cannot be fought cannot be corrected.

If there is a lesson that apparently Democrats have learned, it may be this very one. For instance, you likely did not hear within the last few years from Democrats, "We need better health." What would that have accomplished? Instead, you heard "We need healthcare for everyone." Or "Universal healthcare" or something more specific like that. It does not matter if you or your party agrees with it, what matters is that they were a lot more specific than "We need better health."

If I have any word of advice for conservatives, it would be to quit being so general that nobody knows what the problem is and no one can do anything about it. It may get votes and support, but it does not get legislation or corrective action.

[r3020]

---

@KNAPPer wrote:

I congratulate you for being to actually articulate some problems with regulations. Most conservatives are unable to do that. Just look at 3020 - he couldn't even respond. 

I often wonder whether or not right wingers or even moderates ever see this as a problem. We often hear (actually more than often) politicians and conservative supporters say, "We need less regulation," or more often, "Regulations are hurting business." Actually, I agree. Starting a business is far too tied up in regulation to be something that is easy to do and that hurts job creation.

But here is my point: It is not enough to say that Regulations are hurting business. In order to get something done, conservatives need to identify the top problems and be specific. What can not be identified can not be fought and what cannot be fought cannot be corrected.

If there is a lesson that apparently Democrats have learned, it may be this very one. For instance, you likely did not hear within the last few years from Democrats, "We need better health." What would that have accomplished? Instead, you heard "We need healthcare for everyone." Or "Universal healthcare" or something more specific like that. It does not matter if you or your party agrees with it, what matters is that they were a lot more specific than "We need better health."

If I have any word of advice for conservatives, it would be to quit being so general that nobody knows what the problem is and no one can do anything about it. It may get votes and support, but it does not get legislation or corrective action.

---

What we need is less government and less regulations. Then the problems could heal themselves. Progressive create unsolvable problem then come up with ways to solve them. Everyone of their solutions takes from us a little more of our freedom. Think incandescent light bulbs and tier 4 engines. Their fixes always cost us more money. I am beginning to think this thread is the first time you every heard of a tier 4 engine or R12 freon. I guess you have heard of the end to coal fired power plants and incandescent light bulbs. You know, regulation meant to save us from ourselves.

BTW, nice way to wedge a personal attack in an otherwise excellent post.

[KNAPPer]

Thanks - BTW - Originally you said "RU12" and not R12 refrigerant or R12 Freon. Just Google RU12 and see what you get and then you will understand my confusion on that matter. I get kind of literal when people write things. Perhaps that's a fault. I thought maybe you had some up with something new rather than something that is now very old. I just gave away four cans of R30 that I had from my dad to a guy that works on old cars. I couldn't find a use for it even on my 87 F150.

I do continue to urge you and your fellow conservatives to become specific or risk changing nothing. If you shoot into a flock of ducks, you may not hit a thing, but if you aim at one, you will kill one and if you keep on shooting at a specific target rather than just firing into thin air, pretty soon you might just have your bag limit - putting it in allegorical terms..

[Husker-J]

How about regulations, that would requires farmers to inspect fuel barrels, and containment facilities once per month for having 2,000 gallons total storage for gas, diesel, and bulk oil (and have containment facilities built for any container 56 gallons or bigger), yet lets the oil terminal down the road, that has 1,000,000 in storage, get by with 'annual' inspections?

Or a 'fertilizer tax' that we paid, to give cost share program to fix leaky irrigation equipment, that was found to be so filled with fraud, that the program was scrapped, but the tax remains.

Or regulations, that do not allow a tire shop, to sell me a used tire, to put on a hay wagon that never travels more than 1/4 mile at a time, and never over 10MPH?

Or those pesticide applicator licenses, that basically verify that you can write two checks, one for $30, and another for $25, and stay awake for 3-4 hours?

Or the elimination of the $20 mercury switch for bin stirways, that are now replaced with a $200 computer circuit board 'leveling detector', that is far less reliable.

[cotman03]

I stay involved in the politics of my business.  It's not only the regulations  but the continued threat of more and more that is really scary.   No cost/benefit analysis either.  I just touched on a very few that I have worked on.  There are many others floating around out there.  I am really curious to see how the president's new initiative to battle wealth inequality is going to come out. 

[KNAPPer]

Those are all things that I believe you have a valid point to fight. I believe some of them could be lumped together in a campaign to do away with the regulation. My point is that if you simply say "Less Regulation," how will you or anyone ever address these concerns? How would anyone even know whether you were talking about fire escapes on a skyscraper or outrageous fuel container inspections?

I am all for much deregulation, but I think there is a way to go about it where your message is clear as opposed to hidden. Some regulations are good and I am sure you would agree with that, but some or bad. There has to be a way to clear up the confusion.

FYI, Some of these must be state or local regs. I am not aware of any inspection requirements for my bulk fuel and I can buy used tires lots and lots of places. Don't know about the others, but they sound unfair and not necessary.

[Husker-J]

Just to set the record straight, I am not anti-regulation, just anti-over-regulation.   There needs to be some regulations in place, but when there is someone that is a gross violator, why does the pattern seem to go to little punishment for the wrongdoers, and additional burdeons on everyone else, who was playing by the rules.

Take the big investment banks.  They were involved in the asset bubble, and when it burst, they were bailed out (funny, how the small banks I know of, that went underwater due to the bubble bursting, wound up going under - but that goes back to the elite running the whole show).   Now I keep hearing about the new regulations that they need to prevent it from happening again, and I hear rumors of pages and pages of legislation and regulations to prevent a repeat.

Someone said it here, I can't remember who, I wish I could give them credit, but we don't need piles of new regulations for investment banks.   All that is needed is a simple rule that says if the bank makes the loan, they have to own the loan to the end, they cannot bundle or sell loans to each other, in any way.   Any bank that goes under, willl be allowed to go under, and be restructured by the FDIC, with new management.

It seems too often, that a complex regulatory answer is all that the government can come up with, for a simple problem.

[hobbyfarm2145365]

  Since all the R12 was gone due to leak . .   I fixed the leak buoght a kit adaptors to fit gauges on vacumn pumped  unit for couple of hours,  put in ester oil and 134A thats it.     Run the tractor for 4/5 yrars with no problem   . Many were suckered in to all kinds of parts to make money.   I heard all all the horror stories of ruining compressor, seals and leaks.   .