6 ms·

> When a regulatory agency, following due process according to its mandate, says so. Begging the question.

by pgayed 4y ago

feoren 4y ago
> Begging the question. No: deferring the question. To a regulatory agency. Staffed with hundreds or thousands of intelligent professionals in the discipline. Mandated by congress to deeply study and understand the issues. Spending decades improving and refining their process. Occasionally getting captured by industry or special interests, which we should fight hard to prevent, but won't always win. Often not quite keeping up with the technological edge, but slowly improving. What's the alternative?
- pgayed 4y ago
  Your argument is still circular. Why is the function you’re describing better served by government? For alternatives, see Underwriters Laboratories. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UL_(safety_organization) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UL_(safety_organization) Note that it predates OSHA by ~75 years.
  - feoren 4y ago
    It's not circular logic to say "this is a hard question whose answer depends on the specifics of each individual situation, so let's get a team of experts together to review every case according to a rubric we improve over time." It's an alternative to both "let people do whatever they want" and "mandate one particular thing that everyone must adhere to regardless of their circumstance". The fact that you (bafflingly) disagree with that solution does not make it "circular logic". Logical fallacies are very specific things, not just a bag of stuff to throw at any statement that makes you uncomfortable. You started this conversation off with a series of seemingly rhetorical questions where you apparently just hoped everyone would shrug along with you and wait for you to bless them with your divine wisdom on what the real answer is (which you never actually said, strangely. Don't leave us hanging.) I'm not sure what conclusion you were hoping we'd all draw from them (some libertarian rich-worshipping Ayn Randian bullshit is my guess), but the wind was rather taken out of your sails when I pointed out that you are not the first the pose these questions and the best answer we have is a regulatory agency. > Why is the function you’re describing better served by government? Because government is the only entity with the power to actually enforce regulatons. Underwriters Laboratories is backed by the power of 300 insurance agencies who banded together for the benefit of all of them, recognizing that many problems are too large for individuals to solve and require collective action. Another word for that is "government". You weirdo Libertarians would be invited to the dinner table more if you were willing to just entertain the idea that "GOVERNMENT" is not one big monolithic shadow cabal that we must resist at all costs, but is simply any case where individual entities have come together in order to enable the possibility of collective action on hard problems. Government happens whether you want it to or not. I don't know why all you Lone Wolf Libertarian house-cats think a government made up of whichever mega-corporations happen to win at capitalism is going to be more benevolent than a government that everyone has a say in creating and improving over time.

> When a regulatory agency, following due process according to its mandate, says so. Begging the question.

by pgayed 4y ago

> When a regulatory agency, following due process according to its mandate, says so. Begging the question.

> Begging the question. No: deferring the question. To a regulatory agency. Staffed with hundreds or thousands of intelligent professionals in the discipline. Mandated by congress to deeply study and understand the issues. Spending decades improving and refining their process. Occasionally getting captured by industry or special interests, which we should fight hard to prevent, but won't always win. Often not quite keeping up with the technological edge, but slowly improving. What's the alternative?

pgayed 4y ago
Your argument is still circular. Why is the function you’re describing better served by government? For alternatives, see Underwriters Laboratories. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UL_(safety_organization) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UL_(safety_organization) Note that it predates OSHA by ~75 years.
- feoren 4y ago
  It's not circular logic to say "this is a hard question whose answer depends on the specifics of each individual situation, so let's get a team of experts together to review every case according to a rubric we improve over time." It's an alternative to both "let people do whatever they want" and "mandate one particular thing that everyone must adhere to regardless of their circumstance". The fact that you (bafflingly) disagree with that solution does not make it "circular logic". Logical fallacies are very specific things, not just a bag of stuff to throw at any statement that makes you uncomfortable. You started this conversation off with a series of seemingly rhetorical questions where you apparently just hoped everyone would shrug along with you and wait for you to bless them with your divine wisdom on what the real answer is (which you never actually said, strangely. Don't leave us hanging.) I'm not sure what conclusion you were hoping we'd all draw from them (some libertarian rich-worshipping Ayn Randian bullshit is my guess), but the wind was rather taken out of your sails when I pointed out that you are not the first the pose these questions and the best answer we have is a regulatory agency. > Why is the function you’re describing better served by government? Because government is the only entity with the power to actually enforce regulatons. Underwriters Laboratories is backed by the power of 300 insurance agencies who banded together for the benefit of all of them, recognizing that many problems are too large for individuals to solve and require collective action. Another word for that is "government". You weirdo Libertarians would be invited to the dinner table more if you were willing to just entertain the idea that "GOVERNMENT" is not one big monolithic shadow cabal that we must resist at all costs, but is simply any case where individual entities have come together in order to enable the possibility of collective action on hard problems. Government happens whether you want it to or not. I don't know why all you Lone Wolf Libertarian house-cats think a government made up of whichever mega-corporations happen to win at capitalism is going to be more benevolent than a government that everyone has a say in creating and improving over time.