Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What do you guys think about Nixon-era Regulation?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
liberalpragmatist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-05 02:10 PM
Original message
What do you guys think about Nixon-era Regulation?
I've read a number of critiques of Nixon that blame much of his regulatory schemes for causing the economic problems of the '70s - much of this comes from liberal economists as well as conservative economists. Many of the liberal economists say that while much of it - especially environmental regulation - was essential, Nixon tended to push regulatory schemes purely as political bribes, using them to curry favor with groups for his own reelection. Also, Al Gore undid a lot of those regulatory schemes as VP.

What is the view of these Nixon-era regulations on DU? I admit I don't know a lot about the specifics, and I'm curious what others think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-05 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. regulation is excellent
Edited on Sat Jul-30-05 02:24 PM by oscar111
de regulation is disaster .

regulation gives us all control.

deregulation leads to unsafe food, shabby household electrical items {can you say fires?}, flimsy cars, flimsy houses, ripoffs, bank junk fees, predatory mortgages, et.

Joe Citizen cannot regulate by market choices.. that leads to deaths. And folks just do not spread word of bad items by word of mouth. Odd but true.

Joe Citizen cannot inspect food packing or elctrical cord factories or medical pill factories.. as must be done for our safety.

Dont even think the word "deregulate". I am puzzled at the OP for being prey to such a thing as possibly good.

Deregulate is 100% bad.

The costs of regulation are far, far less than the cost of illnesses it prevents. Regulation does not cost, it pays. By astronomical amounts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-05 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. Properly balanced regulation is essential.
For the environment.

For societal stability.

For fairness.

For us. Everyone. INCLUDING the executives IN THE LONG RUN.

I will do research to see if Nixon's regulations were out of honest reasons or not... but Watergate infers the idea he was out for the highest buck too.

I don't know if reagan's deregulations and clinton/gore's had a benevolant side, but given our worsened need for oil (which is the crucial point to "homeland security"), we are beyond the corner all right... Maybe 25 years ago we could have continued the correct direction. reagan undid alternative energy policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC