'Murica! (364 Viewers)
- Thread starter Fake Melo
- Start date
- Tags afl_italia's cousins forza trump smocking gun
it also basically guts the power of most federal agencies such as osha, cdc, labor, etc to regulate since the exact regulations they follow are based on broad legislation rather than specific. stands to greatly limit the power of the federal government. which in my opinion is dangerous since Congress hasn’t passed a useful law in about a decade
Exactly, because they haven't NEEDED to pass one. They can create broad sweeping laws, start up their own agency, and legislate from that.
Now they might... horror... have to legislate as a branch of government which means they might... shudder... have to compromise!
"But how do you compromise with Nazis?" Great question. Stop calling the side you only slightly disagree with nazis. That rhetoric isn't helpful, is factually incorrect, and is clearly damaging progress.
INSANITY!
Now they might... horror... have to legislate as a branch of government which means they might... shudder... have to compromise!
"But how do you compromise with Nazis?" Great question. Stop calling the side you only slightly disagree with nazis. That rhetoric isn't helpful, is factually incorrect, and is clearly damaging progress.
INSANITY!
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love Congress to actually do something productive. That would be to the huge benefit of the nation.
I think an interesting question is as follows. Should Congress actually legislate that I have to wear a hard hat on a job site or can we trust OSHA to assume that was inferred by broader legislation even though it’s may not be specifically mentioned? Or do we insist Congress amend the law to include specific hard had regulations?
I think an interesting question is as follows. Should Congress actually legislate that I have to wear a hard hat on a job site or can we trust OSHA to assume that was inferred by broader legislation even though it’s may not be specifically mentioned? Or do we insist Congress amend the law to include specific hard had regulations?
I dont know if OSHA making people wear helmets for safety is the same as the EPA ruling what businesses can and cannot exist is the same.
I'd have to do more research into it. OSHA safety regulations result in fines. They don't kill entire industries on a whim.
You cannot take major actions on a whim. You must have clear direction from Congress in the form of law.
So yes, if OSHA told businesses that if they didn't wear helmets their INDUSTRY would be closed I would think OSHA would be beyond their power.
Helmet rules from OSHA and EPA shutting down and killing industries through regulation don't seem like for like. But again, I'd need to research it more. And if you ask "is that what the EPA is really doing" clearly this Supreme Court ruling says yes thats what they were doing. Otherwise it wouldn't have been brought before the SC.
Edit: See, Roberts in the ruling:
If you're trying to kill an entire industry, do it with law. Don't hide behind an agency you created to make such sweeping changes and kill an industry.
I'd have to do more research into it. OSHA safety regulations result in fines. They don't kill entire industries on a whim.
You cannot take major actions on a whim. You must have clear direction from Congress in the form of law.
So yes, if OSHA told businesses that if they didn't wear helmets their INDUSTRY would be closed I would think OSHA would be beyond their power.
Helmet rules from OSHA and EPA shutting down and killing industries through regulation don't seem like for like. But again, I'd need to research it more. And if you ask "is that what the EPA is really doing" clearly this Supreme Court ruling says yes thats what they were doing. Otherwise it wouldn't have been brought before the SC.
Edit: See, Roberts in the ruling:
If you're trying to kill an entire industry, do it with law. Don't hide behind an agency you created to make such sweeping changes and kill an industry.
Mayonnaise, like an AR-15, has legitimate uses, but can also be misused to disastrous effect.
- - - Updated - - -
That's kindof the point (and the beauty) of how the country is set up. Didn't Hamilton say in one of the federalist papers about separation of powers (paraphrasing) "Yeah it's inconvenient, but because the ill that besets us is an excess of legislation, it won't be so bad".
- - - Updated - - -
That's kindof the point (and the beauty) of how the country is set up. Didn't Hamilton say in one of the federalist papers about separation of powers (paraphrasing) "Yeah it's inconvenient, but because the ill that besets us is an excess of legislation, it won't be so bad".
