Deregulation?

What does deregulation mean, when Donald promised to get rid of regulations?

Is it smoking taxes, smoking in bars, drinking ages, bank loan to value rates, or simpler things like go back to old refigerants with flurohydrocarbons or w/e, basically what should we invest in or avoid like hell?

Frankly I don't care about smoking, but I did kind of want to see calories on beer (IPA's are often 300-400).

And, Trump is not an idiot, and he loves Florida, why does he say global warming is not real. Florida floods more regularly...

Other urls found in this thread:

activistpost.com/2013/09/22-medical-studies-that-show-vaccines.html
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170
omsj.org/reports/tomljenovic 2011.pdf
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
ajcn.nutrition.org/content/80/6/1611.full
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14745455
jcn.sagepub.com/content/21/2/170.abstract
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16151044
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15527868
journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0068444
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16338635
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12933322
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560
civileats.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/palmer2008.pdf
ane.pl/pdf/7020.pdf
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19357975
labmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/labmed/33/9/708.full.pdf
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3264864/?tool=pubmed
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I don't think anyone is denying that "global warming" or climate change is real. It's the anthropogenic assertion that rustles jimmies.

Exactly, for something so commonly and religiously held by the masses, the amount of evidence for human causation is remarkably slim.

It's because a lot of the reports discounts a lot of activities, such as weapons tests or natural activities. Also, we're paying the UN a lot of money each year for climate control, when we don't really need to.

Along with the claims of apocalyptic consequences. Warmer periods have historically been better for the human race, and most of the claims made by environmentalists essentially boil down to speaking authoritatively on topics where there is no real certainty. Then they ask us to undermine our whole economy to meet their demands (and line their pockets), and you can see why I'd be skeptical.

definitely no bots on this forum at all

regulations that hamper competition and prevent small businesses from starting up.

Or even dirt poor individuals who want to make jewelry but cant afford some bullshit license. Why the hell should that even be taxed?

LISTEN THE WORLD IS ENDING btw i have a plan to stop it if u vote for me

There's no difference between this brand of fear-mongering and any other save for that they pretend this one is scientific.

You circle jerkers are ignoring the question, im going back to /biz/

1. Warren Buffet HATES Trump, as do all billionares.
2. If you don't understand what he is saying, don't pretend you do.

let me translate what he is saying for STUPID IDIOT MILLENNIALS, into an analogy:

"Deregulating money will make money flow in a direction from one person to another."

He's not saying WHO, or WHY, or WHAT, this is amount to OBAMA THE FUCKING MONKEY THAT FOOLED YOU ALL SAYING "THE PEOPLE WANT CHANGE".

you are AS DUMB AS NIGGERS

The question is: what company or sector of the economy will benefit the most, and how will the company or sector benefit from deregulations?

Are they banks, because they could sell lower LTV loans, and collect the same commision to Fannie Mae, or is it Altria group based on cigarettes?

It's not a political question, it's what sector of the SP500 will be benefiting from a changing of politics?

>It's the anthropogenic assertion that rustles jimmies.
Which is fucking stupid, because it's clearly a factor. It rustles jimmies because it implies companies need to spend money to modernize, and industry is very hesitant to spend money to upgrade existing, working structures.

Wealth transfers are good. Wealth needs to be more concentrated in order to increase efficiency.

>the amount of evidence for human causation is remarkably slim.
it's the opposite actually, that's how science works you don't just go out on a limb

you're mixing science and politics. scientists aren't making any apocalyptic predictions or pushing agendas

oh sick argument

>LISTEN THE WORLD IS ENDING btw i have a plan to stop it if u vote for me
i dare you to find any scientific paper that sounds as retarded as you do now

global temerature average is not warming since last decade..

artics are losing surface, yet, they're not less massive

deregulation means erasing all the political arbitrary interventions that just annoy or stops human actions

what's the sick argument? that the science is false because politicians are hacks? you've already shown yourself to be an intellectual midget

Regulations are what separate the first world from the third world. If you want to see what lack of regulations looks like, travel to Mexico.

>global temerature average is not warming since last decade..
source of this claim mr scientist

if you want to see what absent of law and order, go check a shit hole

regulations are not law and order

regulations are political preferences enforced with guns

If anyone else pursue the same goals in the same ways, it would be called massive crime

Is that why we were almost always more civilized and ahead of the times even without massive government regulations? Fuck off, people know how to avoid accidents themselves.

activistpost.com/2013/09/22-medical-studies-that-show-vaccines.html

Remember the tesla papers?

t. never owned a business

He wants to decrease the number of regulations, not in any specific field but across the board. The sheer quantity of regulations makes owning a business in a place like NY a guaranteed failure unless you can afford to have lawyers working 24/7 decoding the regs. It benefits the ultra-corporation to the detriment of the small business and that's the way (((they))) want it to stay.

That in this case, 'science' is used as an umbrella to avoid dissent. Despite that the actual science is anything but settled.

“The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.”

“We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated.”

“We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject.”

fuck warren
free market is best
energy makes world possible
we should go 100% throium atomic
end foriegn aid
end government management of trade and end UN and end world bank
stop stealing using taxation
us government should be 1% its current size
lower gov spending
fire gov workers
end pub school
desktop computer is result of free market
do that for all industries

>scientific paper
>activistpost.com a tinfoil tabloid site
you're really an idiot aren't you?

Please listen to me so the tiny job market for ultra specific degree holds value that I need it to pay off my massive debt.
Also the scientific consensus that everyone quotes doesn't hold as nearly as much weight as you'd think. I'd post the raw data if I wasn't being a mobile fag right now.

Trump is going to do away with EPA regulations that keep us constrained to saudi's aka OPEC. Doing away with EPA regulations will kickstart our energy independence like never before. The EPA is cucked and compromised.

This. The clean air act was a literal communist plot. Same with the Clean water act.

>Despite that the actual science is anything but settled.
the fact you talk about science as something that is settled or not just goes to show your ignorance on the topic

>i didn't click the link and would rather spout defensive, ad hominem bullshit

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170
omsj.org/reports/tomljenovic 2011.pdf
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
ajcn.nutrition.org/content/80/6/1611.full
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14745455
jcn.sagepub.com/content/21/2/170.abstract
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16151044
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15527868
journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0068444
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16338635
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12933322
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560
civileats.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/palmer2008.pdf
ane.pl/pdf/7020.pdf
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19357975
labmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/labmed/33/9/708.full.pdf
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3264864/?tool=pubmed

>scientific consensus
science doesn't work by consensus, you're just embarrassing yourself. read a book on the scientific method or something. the fact you think this is an argument against climate change just shows you don't know what you're talking about

>and industry is very hesitant to spend money to upgrade existing, working structures.

Which is why US manufacturing died. The car companies are the best examples; they churned out the same absolute trash for 30 years and expected people to keep buying it when other options were available that were cheaper and better just because of "hurr buy murican fuck those faggot liberals and their imports"

Remember when the Prius came out and "Real Americans" shit on it and called it a tree hugger faggot mobile? A whole fuckload of people bought those instead of shitty American cars and we "had to" bail out GM to save those shitty UAW worker's jobs instead of letting the company die like it should have.

Tesla and alternative energy sources are what people want. Ignoring that in favor of "clean coal" (fucking lol) and oil just to save people's shitty jobs instead of training them to do new ones is retarded.

I don't think you understand just how many millions scientists get to stop climate change - and whether you like it or not, even scientists suffer from groupthink.

>you're mixing science and politics

That happened well before I was born, when the environmentalists decided to label their cult as 'Science' to try and get it implemented as the state religion.

The two are inseparable in this sort of discussion.

>science doesn't work by consensus
right, because peer-review isn't the standard for validity in the scientific community or anything.

lmao you got me, Italy. You're either a pretty epic troll or deeply, deeply autistic. Maybe you should refrain from more vaccines since science has also decided that that's the cause and since science decided then we all know we can't argue.

>vaccines
what the fuck has this to do with global warming?

>i dare you to find any scientific paper that sounds as retarded as you do now

how does groupthink explain all the evidence in favor of agw? how come the skeptic scientists aren't able to explain in a satisfactory manner what's causing the increase in temperatures?

>environmentalists
they aren't scientists, what part of that doesn't get through your thick skull?

do you know what peer review is? doesn't sound like it. do you know what evidence is?

>Go back to old refrigerants
Man, I hope so. These new refrigerants make a lot of noise during decompression, and the ones that don't are fucking flammable.

do any of those links say anything remotely close to "vote for the democrats or the world will end"

global warming is real but all the "scientific" evidence for our causing it is drummed up as a convenient ideology in order to make the "CO2 tax" the new global currency of exchange.

...

you think al gore is a scientist and has done scientific research?

REGULATE FUCKING BANKERS

the scientific evidence is there and in no scientific paper that i know of anyone mention a carbon tax or anything of the sort. again you're mixing science with politics.

Basically, all the regulations that were put in place after the stock market crashes.

I guess he wants crashes to happen again.

...

>Or even dirt poor individuals who want to make jewelry but cant afford some bullshit license. Why the hell should that even be taxed?

to pay for the police and fire department and all the roads that lead to the business and the military that protects it

thanks for losing the argument so easily

>says the (((man))) who thinks the science is settled on man-made climate change

>ages, bank loan to value rates, or simpler things like go back to old refigerants with flurohydrocarbons or w/e, basically what should we invest in or avoid like hell?

It's mostly business jargon that will make you poorer (but hey, corporations are earning more money!).

>Trump is going to do away with EPA regulations that keep us constrained to saudi's aka OPEC.
America can't maximize profiteering unless we allow corporations to pollute our water and skies with toxic waste?


>Doing away with EPA regulations will kickstart our energy independence like never before.
It will also kickstart the major cancer clusters like never before.
>The clean air act was a literal communist plot. Same with the Clean water act.
That "gommunisht blot" slowed the deluge of carcinogens, pathogens and pesticides in our lungs and stomachs.

Every living organism in the world now has DDT in it.

Nah, wealth diffusion is much better for the economy and for capital allocation. Somebody who has more to lose will make smarter bets.

...

>Which is why US manufacturing died.
No, US manufacturing died because corporations must pay into employee health insurance which is built into the cost of the product, and the rest of the industrial world has national health care so their corporations can sell their manufactured goods for less.

more like, in china they basically don't have healthcare or workplace safety and if you get hurt you just get fired and go die

a guy I know just had a very minor oil leak at his house. EPA made him excavate his entire lawn several feet down and replace it all out of pocket.

nigga, a shovel and a bucket would have been sufficient to get rid of the contaminated area.

That's the kind of regulations that need to go

>science is not something that's either settled or not
are you retarded?

...

>a guy I know just had a very minor oil leak at his house. EPA made him excavate his entire lawn several feet down and replace it all out of pocket.

why was his house leaking oil

there was a small crack in the tank

why does his house have an oil tank

starting to sound less and less small

> global warming is caused by humans because I read that several scientists believe that.
Literally that's your point.
Go make some pasta or pizza because all you faggots are good for is cooking.

because the windmills were down.

that's not my point lardass. the evidence supporting agw is overwhelming, you're the one who brought up this supposed scientific consensus as your argument you fucking retard

for heating

is that not a thing where you are?

houses that use oil for heat have external tanks

nope you could not do that here

...

The vast majority of regulations are bureaucratic red tape that kill small business.

well in that case. People have oil tanks on the side of their house, the oil company comes every once in a while in an oil truck and refills it

holy shit you keep a tank of oil the size of a car right outside your house?

what state is that?

Sounds like a dumb way to heat your house. Why not just use an electric heater? Less change of your house blowing up.

Oil isn't explosive. The failure rate per capita is much lower than electric heaters.

>third world
>masses of brown people
>first world
>responsible amount of white people
>it's regulations that separate us

it's not that clean cut

Oil is cheaper and more efficient.

new york
thats a pretty large one, but yes

an electric heater is literally 100% efficient

>more like, in china they basically don't have healthcare or workplace safety and if you get hurt you just get fired and go die

Then let's be a lot more like Communist China so our corporations can make a few extra dollars a year /sarc.

>Murrican education

And how is that electricity generated? I bet its by burning coal which has an efficiency of around 35%

no it actually just comes out of the wall from the plug idiot

>a guy I know just had a very minor oil leak at his house. EPA made him excavate his entire lawn several feet down and replace it all out of pocket.
Why did the homeowner call the EPA?


>nigga, a shovel and a bucket would have been sufficient to get rid of the contaminated area.
That's what he should have done BEFORE the dumbass called the EPA on himself.

what the hell are you talking about?
are you high?

had to replace the tank, and I think it's one of those mandated reporter situations for the installer

>had to replace the tank, and I think it's one of those mandated reporter situations for the installer

You like the GOP's Operation TIPS? That was the Bush administration.

>B-b-but Bush!
What the fuck is your point faggot?
Bush isn't in office now .

>Wealth transfers are good. Wealth needs to be more concentrated in order to increase efficiency.
Private wealth concentration is parasitic to the economy and it greatly diminishes the efficiency of capital allocation.

What is more productive? A CEO who makes 500 times his average employee's wage, or 500 additional employees on the production line?

Bring back asbestos!

what am i lookingat

>B-b-but Bush!
*Operation TIPS*

the Terrorism Information and Prevention System, was a domestic intelligence-gathering program designed by President George W. Bush to have United States citizens report suspicious activity. The program's website implied that US workers who had access to private citizens' homes, such as cable installers and telephone repair workers, would be reporting on what was in people's homes if it were deemed "suspicious."

>What the fuck is your point faggot?
One day, if you graduate from 5th grade, maybe then you'll understand.

>Bush isn't in office now.
The GOP's spy programs survived the end of Bush's terms in office. Kinda surprising you didn't know that.

This moron seriously thinks antiterrorism laws are the reason why the EPA was notified about a leaking oil tank.
Sad.