3 ms·

>> You could say that humanity has repeatedly and organically come to a solution broadly known as government and regulation. > I disagree vehemently to this pr

>> You could say that humanity has repeatedly and organically come to a solution broadly known as government and regulation. > I disagree vehemently to this proposition. I have never agreed or voted to get those regulations in place. They are not voluntary. But anyone falling for tether today is making an individual decision. Nevertheless, you benefit from them. It's not like you have to sign up to the regulation that makes your murder illegal. Don't you think it would be foolish to expect every generation to have to rediscover, through trial and error, the benefits of society and government?

conanbatt 9y ago
An important distinction has to be made between law abiding and regulation. Law against murder is: if you do it, you will be jailed. Regulation against murder is: you cant have anything that harms another human being, and we need to check you up regularly to make sure you haven't killed anyone. Regulation is not abiding for the law. Thats what lawsuits are about. Regulation is about preventing law to be broken with preventive measures. > Don't you think it would be foolish to expect every generation to have to rediscover, through trial and error, the benefits of society and government? I wish we had that, but we can't, we have to live entire generations with laws designed by previous ones. Isn't the drug war on the US a prime example of that? If you put it up for a vote, the majority would vote to make it legal or not prosecute it. But this is not a topic about the mere existence of government, its about an ecosystem that was born and fueled about how the government and the banks crap on people, and trying to make it better with banks and government is going the other way.
- Slansitartop 9y ago
  I think you're confused about the differences between a law and a regulation. As I understand it, at least in the US context, regulations are rules specify the finer details of the implementation of a law. You can be jailed for the violation of a regulation [1]. > I wish we had that, but we can't, we have to live entire generations with laws designed by previous ones. There's an expression that describes your attitude, it's "throwing the baby out with the bathwater." The thing about "the laws designed by previous [generations]" is that most of them are good, and the ones that aren't will eventually be abolished or modified, in a democratic society. > and trying to make it better The attempt is ignorant "disruption" that's repeating, word for word many of the long-solved mistakes of the past. If you want to make something better, you can't focus on the just problems of the current solution, but you also have to focus on all the problems the current solution already solved. To do otherwise is foolishness. [1] For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_Regulations#Enforcement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_... lists several instances.
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    > I think you're confused about the differences between a law and a regulation. As I understand it, at least in the US context, regulations are rules specify the finer details of the implementation of a law. You can be jailed for the violation of a regulation [1]. Sure, but violating the regulation has no victim. If you sold lemonade on a stand in california, you would be breaking regulations but there is no victim that would ever sue you for damages. Regulations, at least in general, about preventing something from happening by restricting action. Legal action is about responsibility: if something happens you are going to be accountable for that which happened. Tether deserves a lawsuit on fraud, because they committed fraud. But we don't need the sec for that. > There's an expression that describes your attitude, it's "throwing the baby out with the bathwater." The thing about "the laws designed by previous [generations]" is that most of them are good, and the ones that aren't will eventually be abolished or modified, in a democratic society. Tell that to all the people doing 25+y for doing or dealing pot. They must agree with you! > For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_.... lists several instances. I'm no expert on arms dealing but isnt the US Gov the one that gives out the most weapons to radicals? I thought the US as a successful exporter of weapons..and certainly of violence! Don't miss the fact that regulation is excercised by people with the same incentives as anybody else, but with more power.
    - Slansitartop 9y ago
      > Tell that to all the people doing 25+y for doing or dealing pot. They must agree with you! > I'm no expert on arms dealing but isnt the US Gov the one that gives out the most weapons to radicals? I thought the US as a successful exporter of weapons..and certainly of violence! I feel like you're just going for cheap points, but the thing is you don't even get those if you can't stay on topic. It's kinda pointless to talk with you if you keep running off on random tangents. Aren't we talking about financial regulation? Actually, I'm not even sure if there's anything to your comments beyond an emotional hostility to the concept of regulation or something represented by it, so maybe we're not even communicating at all.
      - 9y ago

conanbatt 9y ago

An important distinction has to be made between law abiding and regulation. Law against murder is: if you do it, you will be jailed. Regulation against murder is: you cant have anything that harms another human being, and we need to check you up regularly to make sure you haven't killed anyone. Regulation is not abiding for the law. Thats what lawsuits are about. Regulation is about preventing law to be broken with preventive measures. > Don't you think it would be foolish to expect every generation to have to rediscover, through trial and error, the benefits of society and government? I wish we had that, but we can't, we have to live entire generations with laws designed by previous ones. Isn't the drug war on the US a prime example of that? If you put it up for a vote, the majority would vote to make it legal or not prosecute it. But this is not a topic about the mere existence of government, its about an ecosystem that was born and fueled about how the government and the banks crap on people, and trying to make it better with banks and government is going the other way.

Slansitartop 9y ago
I think you're confused about the differences between a law and a regulation. As I understand it, at least in the US context, regulations are rules specify the finer details of the implementation of a law. You can be jailed for the violation of a regulation [1]. > I wish we had that, but we can't, we have to live entire generations with laws designed by previous ones. There's an expression that describes your attitude, it's "throwing the baby out with the bathwater." The thing about "the laws designed by previous [generations]" is that most of them are good, and the ones that aren't will eventually be abolished or modified, in a democratic society. > and trying to make it better The attempt is ignorant "disruption" that's repeating, word for word many of the long-solved mistakes of the past. If you want to make something better, you can't focus on the just problems of the current solution, but you also have to focus on all the problems the current solution already solved. To do otherwise is foolishness. [1] For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_Regulations#Enforcement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_... lists several instances.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  > I think you're confused about the differences between a law and a regulation. As I understand it, at least in the US context, regulations are rules specify the finer details of the implementation of a law. You can be jailed for the violation of a regulation [1]. Sure, but violating the regulation has no victim. If you sold lemonade on a stand in california, you would be breaking regulations but there is no victim that would ever sue you for damages. Regulations, at least in general, about preventing something from happening by restricting action. Legal action is about responsibility: if something happens you are going to be accountable for that which happened. Tether deserves a lawsuit on fraud, because they committed fraud. But we don't need the sec for that. > There's an expression that describes your attitude, it's "throwing the baby out with the bathwater." The thing about "the laws designed by previous [generations]" is that most of them are good, and the ones that aren't will eventually be abolished or modified, in a democratic society. Tell that to all the people doing 25+y for doing or dealing pot. They must agree with you! > For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_.... lists several instances. I'm no expert on arms dealing but isnt the US Gov the one that gives out the most weapons to radicals? I thought the US as a successful exporter of weapons..and certainly of violence! Don't miss the fact that regulation is excercised by people with the same incentives as anybody else, but with more power.
  - Slansitartop 9y ago
    > Tell that to all the people doing 25+y for doing or dealing pot. They must agree with you! > I'm no expert on arms dealing but isnt the US Gov the one that gives out the most weapons to radicals? I thought the US as a successful exporter of weapons..and certainly of violence! I feel like you're just going for cheap points, but the thing is you don't even get those if you can't stay on topic. It's kinda pointless to talk with you if you keep running off on random tangents. Aren't we talking about financial regulation? Actually, I'm not even sure if there's anything to your comments beyond an emotional hostility to the concept of regulation or something represented by it, so maybe we're not even communicating at all.
    - 9y ago