Role of government when "unfettered market is not enough"

Re: Thomas (Post 5512131)
Some government regulation is necessary, at least in America, as not every capitalist has the best intentions of the workers in mind. Contrary to popular belief, not everyone is a white hat wearing do-gooder. That's why business needs a certain level of oversight.

BUT...

Government should not become a hindrance to the business world either. When companies actively work to reduce employee hours, keep employee levels below a certain number due to government constraints and regulations and when government regulations swamp business in hours upon hours of paperwork you know that there is too much over sight.

so, it's good for someone else's business, but not mine.

When you get your OSHA inspection and the fine is only $5000 and you are HAPPY about that, there is too much oversight... read that sentence again... now read it like this... No matter what, OSHA WILL find something wrong. There is no business that gets an OSHA inspection and is not fined for something. It's become a self-feeding monster.

I don't know what business you are in, but I worked in manufacturing for 35 years and OSHA fines were rare.



Yeah, we need government for sure. We need a certain level of oversight, but that is not what we have now.

So far as taking care of those that need it? Hell yeah. Get those folks the leg up they need. But, why are there now 10 million people on disability? That's the same as the population of Greece. Imagine that. The entire population of Greece could have moved to America and just gone on disability...

American dream, be gone with you. It's easier, though not as pretty, to just collect the check instead of working hard, saving money and bettering your position. That's only for immigrants now. People moving here from a place where they know actual misery. They move to the US, work their asses off and become successful. Natural born Americans have become the Weebels of the world. It's a real shame.
Just collect the check? You should try govt assistance and see how pleasant it is. Try working hard for minimum wage and save money. What's changed in America is the lack of opportunity to climb up the ladder.

To expect any head of government to be able to significantly reverse income inequality in their term, is unrealistic. But making it a headline topic, and making a start is worthwhile, is it not?

As congressional negotiators work toward a budget deal to avoid another government shutdown, a majority of Americans appear to want some sort of agreement to be struck that would avoid triggering another round of automatic government budget cuts.

According to the most recent United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, a commanding majority of those surveyed, 61 percent, would undo all or some of the automatic sequester cuts, which remain the law of the land. Just 18 percent favored enacting all of the required cuts.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressional-connection/coverage/poll-majority-of-americans-say-bag-sequestration-20131209

WASHINGTON -- House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) assailed conservative groups Thursday for opposing the latest budget deal, saying they had crossed a line and lost their credibility.

"This budget agreement takes giant steps in the right direction," Boehner said at a press conference. "But when groups come out and criticize something they've never seen, you begin to wonder just how credible those actions are."

Boehner has been reticent in the past to criticize conservative outside groups, such as Heritage Action and Club for Growth. Some of the groups have had a considerable influence on the tea party faction among House Republicans, and were the rallying force behind the effort to either defund Obamacare or shut down the federal government.

For the first time, Boehner acknowledged that these groups pushed Republicans into an unsuccessful strategy that he didn't favor. He expressed particular outrage that one of the groups later said it knew the shutdown strategy wasn't going to work.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/12/boehner-conservative-groups_n_4433631.html

I disagree that Obama has been short on efforts to bring about equality. The problem is that the Republicans have decreed that there shall be no cooperation with any Obama (or Dem) initiatives, and have killed most things that Obama has sought to accomplish. He has tried economic stimulus, raising taxes on the wealthy, the ACA, etc., with little to show for it. He is now trying to increase the minimum wage.

There may be an equality movement (including the $15 an hour initiative) that has staying power. The public seems to be catching on that the middle class is rapidly disappearing.

I am afraid you are wrong on everything. For instance, he did push for higher rates for the rich, but, with the filibuster, there was no chance for success.

He proposed infrastructure projects to get, and keep people, into the middle class (and also spur the economy). But the GOP made sure that nothing happened.

The healthcare industry in the country is 20 percent of GDP. When it was only 10 percent, economists said this was unsustainable. I think the ACA will go a long way to lessen the income going to the super rich who benefit from this industry.

You seem to be an outright Obama hater.

Advocate wrote:

I disagree that Obama has been short on efforts to bring about equality. The problem is that the Republicans have decreed that there shall be no cooperation with any Obama (or Dem) initiatives, and have killed most things that Obama has sought to accomplish. He has tried economic stimulus, raising taxes on the wealthy, the ACA, etc., with little to show for it. He is now trying to increase the minimum wage.

The economic stimulus wasn't aimed at achieving economic equality. It was aimed at ending the recession primarily by rescuing creditor institutions, many of which used the stimulus funds to reward themselves. If its intent was to narrow economic inequality, it was poorly conceived and criminally managed.

WASHINGTON — Hoping to lay a politically bruising year to rest, President Obama on Tuesday declared a “year of action” in which he said he would work with lawmakers when he could, but would sidestep them to move proposals to help low- and middle-income families share in the economic recovery.
In his State of the Union address, Obama promised to flex his power to boost wages, protect the environment and channel resources to education, starting with an executive order to raise the minimum wage for federal contractors.
Before a joint session of Congress, Obama told lawmakers in the House chamber that he was eager to have their help to strengthen the middle class, but that he wouldn't be clipped by Congress in his drive to “reverse these tides” of economic inequality.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-state-of-the-union-obama-2014-20140128,0,2195484.story#ixzz2rnLaEyV3

Each year we leave billions of dollars of unclaimed benefits on the table. This money lies beneath layers of bureaucracy. It requires a Herculean effort even to identify a fraction of the resources.

Studies have shown that participation rates in these programs vary wildly. Even in a program as critical as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP or food stamps), only 75 percent of eligible Americans received assistance in 2012. In other words, millions of eligible Americans end up not using the benefits and services that are there to help stave off poverty and focus on economic opportunity as opposed to subsistence. We must show our elected representatives the value of these benefits and the ability they have to make our economy stronger.

For too long these programs have been the fodder of partisan debate. The truth is that these should be the very programs that bring both sides together.

These programs are more important than ever: real wages for all but the elite in American society have been stagnant for three decades.

Students comprise a substantial number of Americans who need these benefits, but simply don’t know how to access them. Today’s benefits can sustain a new generation through the process of education and (re)investment in high-skills, high-tech sectors. So, in a very real sense, they hold the key to the long-term stability and success of our society.

The outcomes of even limited efforts to increase access speak for themselves. For example, the average community college student we’ve worked with is eligible to draw down an additional $5,400 in benefits or a total of nearly $195 million, making it more likely they will graduate and enter the job force.

The same is true for veterans and their families, many of whom are eligible for critical benefits. Surely we owe the men and women who fought for our country a decent chance to reintegrate into civilian life in a troubled economy.

As the president said, "America does not stand still. And neither will I." Neither should we. It is up to us to harness the reality that change can begin today.

Here are just a few things we can do right now: First, we need to make sure people know that these programs exist. Second, we must pressure our government to streamline the process of accessing these programs. Third, we must be ready to fight to ensure the funding for these critical benefits does not fall victim to politics.
Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-budget/196984-upward-mobility-need-not-wait#ixzz2s1DENFgh
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Federal Aviation Administration would be required to set new minimum requirements for seats on airplanes under legislation to be considered in the House this week, possibly giving passengers a break from ever-shrinking legroom and cramped quarters.

The regulation of seat width and legroom is part of a five-year extension of federal aviation programs announced early Saturday by Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate committees that oversee the nation’s air travel.

Congress faces a Sept. 30 deadline to keep FAA programs running. The Senate will also need to take up the bill this week or both chambers will need to pass a short-term extension.

The bill would prohibit the involuntary bumping of passengers who have already boarded a plane. But in a nod to the power of the commercial airliners, lawmakers declined to include language that would have prohibited airlines from imposing fees deemed “not reasonable and proportional.”

Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida said lawmakers from both chambers agreed it was time to take action on “ever-shrinking seats.”

“Relief could soon be on the way for weary airline passengers facing smaller and smaller seats,” Nelson said.

In July, the FAA rejected the idea of setting minimum standards for airlines seats and legroom as a safety measure. But Congress appears determined to require the FAA to do so.

The room between rows — measured from a point on one seat to the same point on the seat in the next row — has been shrinking for many years as airlines squeeze more seats onto their planes. It was once commonly 34 or 35 inches, and is now less than 30 inches on some planes.

Lawmakers also included several provisions to address concerns about increased airport noise levels caused by new flight paths. The bill would require the FAA to study the potential health impacts of flight noise and the feasibility of amending existing departure procedures.

The bill would also mandate that flight attendants get a minimum of 10 hours of rest between their work shifts and require airlines to communicate better with customers during mass flight cancellations and groundings.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, said he expects the House and Senate to move quickly to send the bill to the president’s desk.