 |
|  |
 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Adam Smith
There is no "best available", and no "subject to cost" criterion. Its just "use this specific technology", which was state of the art at the time the regs were written in the late 60's. The reason might have been that railroads were viewed as a mature industry, not likely to experience technical change.
|
And that was written into _primary_ legislation with all the detail?
Addendum: Just took a look at our legislation, there is just one paragraph of parliamentary legislation referring to safety and available technolgy. The details are in a 25 para regulation that only relates to a few specific technical standards.
Is there a reason for Congress to mandate the use of specific technolgies? Someone's pork in that?
Last edited by HershOstropoler on 23-11-2003 at 02:59
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:32
|
|
Kid, we all know that Lincoln declared slavery to be a "moral" wrong. Today, it is the religious right that declares "abortion" to be a moral wrong. Yesterday, it was these same people who declared communism to be a moral wrong. Democrats, in contrast, are hard put to say why communism is wrong other that it is unreasonable.
On this issue, there is no difference between the religious right of today and of that day.
On the issue of using government to promote business, this was the Whig platform. Here is a snippet from 1840,
"The young Abraham Lincoln, then an Illinois state legislator, traveled widely in the state while campaigning for Harrison. The campaign of 1840 introduced what historians call the United States' "Second Party System." The Whig Party emerged in that year as a viable opponent to the followers of Andrew Jackson who had coalesced into the Democratic Party. Where Democrats often advocated a laissez-faire, or "let alone" policy in economic and social life, Whigs actively sought to use government policy to promote economic development and moral improvement. Where Democrats identified themselves as a "white man's party," some local Whig organizations permitted women, who could not vote, to take part in other campaign activities. A few influential northern Whigs came to entertain the idea of abolishing African-American slavery as well."
http://lincoln.lib.niu.edu/gal/chs30537.html
Compare the policies of the Whigs and modern Republican Party on business and morality. They are IDENTCAL!
Compare the policy of the Democrats on moral issues and society: Hands OFF! They are the same today.
Only on the issue of "laissez-faire" has the Democrat Party changed, although, IMO, Bill Clinton was a "laissez-faire" Democrat. Clearly, Dean is not. But the hallmark of the Democrat Party of today is that it is anti-business.
The core values of the Republican Party are unchanged. If Lincoln was a liberal, then today's Republicans are liberals.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999 time: 23:32
|
|
quote: Ramo, The right favor's slavery? |
Some of the right does, yes.
quote: The religious right is the party that ended it in England and the United States. |
1. The liberal party in England (the Whigs) abolished slavery while the conservative party (the Tories) opposed abolition of slavery.
2. In 1860, the Republicans were better descriged as the liberal party. In 1860, what liberalism stood for are the interests of big industry, while what conservatism stood for big agriculture.
quote: Recall that it is you Democrats that were the party of slavery, for slavery and upon slavery. |
1. I'm certainly not a (big-d) Democrat.
2. Democrat is not the same as leftist.
3. The Democratic party of 1860 is totally different from the Democratic party of 2003.
quote: 3. You have never done anything meaningful to stop it. |
That's because you're deluded. Maybe in Ned-land, the left has nothing to do with opposition to slavery, but back in planet earth that isn't the case.
I pointed out exactly what one [center-]leftist (Dean) would do to stop slavery; leverage trading rights over other states to pressure them into implementing minimal labor standards. You haven't pointed out exactly how Shrub's speech is anything but insubstantial blather, and nor have you explained his friendliness to regimes that support forms of slavery.
quote: Even today, you keep the black man is a new form of separate but equal called the welfare state where they can stay in their ghetto permanetly, supported by welfare. |
1. Yes, me and my support of a massive welfare state. Do you ever read what I post, or do you automatically assume that I have the same opinion as your stereotypical leftist?
2. Do you honestly believe that social welfare keeps people from leaving ghettos and getting 6 figure jobs? I take it you've never had gov't assistance in doing anything? Or maybe, daddy was able to take care of everything?
quote: Get a clue.
The funds I'm referring to are soft, very soft, money. The average donor size has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. There are several large funds not explicitly associated with the Democratic party, but for practical purposes dedicated to that cause. They have sprung up just this year to get around campaing finacne reform. This was a well-reported story. Get with the picture. |
The Dean campaign isn't funded right now by soft money. It's picked up momentum because it has such broad support among ordinary people who are willing to shell out what little they can afford. The candidate wasn't hand-picked by the DLC and wall street. Dean has proven that a democratic campaign is workable, and his election will encourage more of the same.
And while soft money will certainly play a part by Dean (if he wins) in the general election, but that won't be the case after more stringent campaign finance laws.
And get a new catch phrase. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
quote: Originally posted by TCO
And what I'm telling you is that from personal experience in the FDA GMP area, I've seen it lead to occasional platinum plating. That doesn't have to happen. But it may.
|
And all I said is that BAT is overall better than a technology mandated by statute. I know that you disagree with me as a matter of principle, but saying that BAT is flexible and does not always lead to perfect results is kicking in an open door.
"I'm unfamiliar with regs that have an economic spec written in. Certainly not one that is numeric."
Of course it's not numeric. Yet BAT usually includes an economic element. Where I'm currently working, IPPC law, the definitiion is technologies "developed on a scale which allows implementation in the relevant industrial sector, under economically and technically viable conditions, taking into consideration the costs and advantages, (...), as long as they are reasonably accessible to the operator."
"In the end, best available comes down to judegement calls and you get "clarification memos" and such"
Of course you need guidelines or even secondary legislation to get that broad fluffy outline applicable.
"It's not awful. But not perfect."
And what's perfect?
"But then some really rich competitor decides to buy it. And before you know it, it is GMP. And you are doing it to."
You always have early adoptors. Doesn't change the standard.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
TCO
|
 |
Richmond, VA
Jan 1970 time: 00:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by HershOstropoler
And all I said is that BAT is overall better than a technology mandated by statute. I know that you disagree with me as a matter of principle, but saying that BAT is flexible and does not always lead to perfect results is kicking in an open door.
"I'm unfamiliar with regs that have an economic spec written in. Certainly not one that is numeric."
Of course it's not numeric. Yet BAT usually includes an economic element. Where I'm currently working, IPPC law, the definitiion is technologies "developed on a scale which allows implementation in the relevant industrial sector, under economically and technically viable conditions, taking into consideration the costs and advantages, (...), as long as they are reasonably accessible to the operator."
"In the end, best available comes down to judegement calls and you get "clarification memos" and such"
Of course you need guidelines or even secondary legislation to get that broad fluffy outline applicable.
"It's not awful. But not perfect."
And what's perfect?
"But then some really rich competitor decides to buy it. And before you know it, it is GMP. And you are doing it to."
You always have early adoptors. Doesn't change the standard. |
BAT may be generally better. (I don't know whether it's "always better" or not. Obviously if it has a downside, there is a possbility that there may be times when that downside outweighs other downsides.) In any case, it is useful to know the way it has flaws.
Last edited by TCO on 23-11-2003 at 21:41
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999 time: 23:32
|
|
quote: Ramo, welfare doesn't keep the enterpising black from leaving the ghetto any more that Indian "welfare" doesn't keep the Indian on the reservation. However, the vast majority still stay on the reservation because they have no need to leave it. |

quote: Also, it is the liberals who oppose vouchers, the only chance many blacks have of getting a better education. The liberals insist on keeping the blacks confined in the failed ghetto schools while they send their elitist kids to expensive private schools. |
Of course, the voucher plans conservatives support tend not to give the poor enough money to actually pay for a private education, and thus would deprive the poor of even more public funding.
quote: On liberal-conservative, these change over time depending on who is defending the status quo. However, the label "conservative" has been today affixed to the Republican Party even though its core principles are the same as they were in the days of Lincoln. |
Ah yes, Lincoln's principles. You mean the principles that the military should break strikes, that the state should redistribute wealth from the poor to the rich, that poor farmers should be ****ed over, and that blacks are inferior to whites and that they should be deprived of true liberty? Yes, I agree; the Republicans do subscribe to these priciples.
quote: However, today's liberals have nothing in common with Lincoln. |
Unfortunately that's not the case. 
Last edited by Ramo on 24-11-2003 at 10:02
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32. Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|