Thursday, July 28, 2011

Want More Jobs? Remove Barriers to Job Creation

Click to enlarge.
From today's WSJ, an excellent editorial by Chip Mellor and Dick Carpenter, both of the Institute for Justice, about excessive occupational licensing at the state level:

"With the abysmal recent jobs report, it's tempting to point to flat hiring as another example of the federal government's impotence at stimulating growth. Lost amid the hand-wringing and focus on Washington, D.C., however, is the unhelpful role of state governments in making joblessness worse.

Their harmful method is occupational licensure. By imposing onerous and usually pointless requirements on those wishing to enter a trade or line of work, state legislatures erect needless barriers around occupations perfectly suited for those entering the work force, midcareer switchers, and pink-slip recipients. Only one in 20 workers needed the government's permission to pursue their chosen occupation in the 1950s, notes University of Minnesota Prof. Morris Kleiner. Today that figure is nearly one in three (see chart above from a related February 2011 front page WSJ article "A License to Shampoo: Jobs Needing State Approval Rise").

The Institute for Justice is examining the licensing requirements of 100 occupations across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The occupations are those that pay less than the median income and are sufficiently established to be recognized by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. What we have found paints a stupefying picture of irrational regulation with pernicious effects

Conclusion: Instead of looking to the federal government to create jobs, state legislatures could have a real and immediate effect on unemployment in their states by showing how less truly is more. They can remove the barriers to job creation that their predecessors erected and enjoy the job-generating drive of their states' aspiring entrepreneurs."

74 Comments:

At 7/28/2011 10:35 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

I actually AGREE with this in part but licensing is needed... or else we get people who are not qualified to perform things - that can harm others....

But licensing that is so strict and so rigorous that it end up restricting competition is not good.

Let me relate something that happened in my community.

A couple of group Medical groups routinely hire new medical professionals and they make them sign a non-compete contract so that if they leave - they agree contractually not to no longer practice in the area and in the process lose all their patients.

Is this similar to Govt "restricting" competition?

Can the "free market" "restrict" competition just like the govt can?

 
At 7/28/2011 11:46 AM, Blogger geoih said...

Quote from Larry G.: "Is this similar to Govt "restricting" competition? Can the "free market" "restrict" competition just like the govt can?"

We have all of these regulated and government restricted markets now, but we still have firms that are incompetent. What makes you think that some government bureaucrat will be any better at selecting who is 'licensed' that any other person?

Suppose a government bureaucrat makes a mistake and licenses a firm that shouldn't be? Suppose they refuse a license to a firm that should be licensed? What are the consequences to the bureaucrat? Nothing. There are no repercussions. No positive or negative feedback. How is this better than the market?

All you get is a system with the facade of protecting society from evil and incompetence, but really is a system that protects and enhances the worthless bureaucracy.

 
At 7/28/2011 11:56 AM, Blogger Benjamin said...

All the braying about the virtures to state and local government ignores the fact they are the most repressive governments we have.

You need a license for many trades; you can't drive a jitney, run a push-dart etc. They tell you if you can have a liquor store.

The city can seize your land by eminent domain or re-zone (downzone) it any way they want.

In Texas, the county assessor's office can raise your property taxes at will, by deciding what is highest and best use for your land.

In fact, most local and state government are extensions of business sectors trying hard to stomp out competition.

I can remember when states tried to stop people from voting or marrying someone of a different race.

Tell me about states' rights. P.U.

 
At 7/28/2011 6:08 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"I actually AGREE with this in part but licensing is needed... or else we get people who are not qualified to perform things - that can harm others...."

In what way? Would private, voluntary certification serve the same function?

No, Larry, a private business requiring non-compete agreements as a condition of employment isn't the same as government restricting competition.

 
At 7/29/2011 12:11 AM, Blogger Hydra said...

Local govt is as bad or worse than the state.

And they can reassess my property at its highest and best use any time. Beats the hell out of being artificially zoned solely for the manufacture of buggy whips.

 
At 7/29/2011 4:28 PM, Blogger James said...

Bravo

 
At 7/29/2011 5:35 PM, Blogger hypnohotshot said...

After coming to California from the UK some years ago I had the same realisation about over regulation. All levels of government seek to keep expanding their power base. Here in West Hollywood recently, the local authority wanted to 1) regulate the height of hedges around privately owned residences deemed local monuments and 2) disallow smoking inside private apartments, to protect others from second hand smoke! Luckily neither flew. But regulation on all levels, designed to protect against every eventuality, is stifling.

hypnosis & hypnotherapy Los Angeles

 
At 7/29/2011 7:03 PM, Blogger 50scars said...

The origin of all licensing laws are the people already in the business--they want to restrict new competitors who may wish to enter the business. They always include grandfather clauses for those already in the business, so they don't have to take the tests and otherwise jump through the hoops the new people must endure.

 
At 7/30/2011 8:14 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

Instead of looking to the federal government to create jobs, state legislatures could have a real and immediate effect on unemployment in their states by showing how less truly is more.

I agree. But the states are bankrupt and will do all that they can to get as much revenues to keep their corrupt system going for as long as possible. Local politicians need a lot of support from the public employee unions and care far less for the taxpayer.

I actually AGREE with this in part but licensing is needed... or else we get people who are not qualified to perform things - that can harm others....

Nonsense. What harm is done by a bad haircut in comparison to the harm done by artificially propping up the price of getting your hair done? Do you really think that the incompetent providers will stay in business long enough to harm consumers? People are not stupid. If they don't get what they expected from one service provider they will move business to one that is better.

A couple of group Medical groups routinely hire new medical professionals and they make them sign a non-compete contract so that if they leave - they agree contractually not to no longer practice in the area and in the process lose all their patients.

Is this similar to Govt "restricting" competition?


This does not work because in a free market others will come in and fill a need if there is a profit to be made. Government can force people to comply and keep practitioners out. Private organizations can't.

 
At 7/30/2011 9:31 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

" Nonsense. What harm is done by a bad haircut in comparison to the harm done by artificially propping up the price of getting your hair done? Do you really think that the incompetent providers will stay in business long enough to harm consumers? People are not stupid. If they don't get what they expected from one service provider they will move business to one that is better."

anything that involves hygiene or the health and safety need certification IMHO.

the simple act of replacing your disc brakes - done wrong - by someone who does know now how to do it but did not have to be certified might change one's mind on this.

Or a barber who has a communicable disease .....

or a Dentist who does have required autoclave equipment,

then we have simple non-threatening but stealing.. like gas pumps that meter "short" or scales at the checkout "heavy weighing" your produce.

It's not so much what you believe on this as it is what MOST people believe and WANT in the way of regulations and since you are a minority on the issue -your job is to "convince" the rest of us and your technique is "poor" when there usually liberal insults involved.

 
At 7/30/2011 12:42 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"anything that involves hygiene or the health and safety need certification IMHO.

the simple act of replacing your disc brakes - done wrong - by someone who does know now how to do it but did not have to be certified might change one's mind on this.
"

You really don't think these things through before you begin typing, do you Larry.

Do you actually believe brake shop owners hire people who can't demonstrated any skill in working on brakes?

Work done incorrectly costs the owner time, money, and loss of repeat business. Actual harm to a customer could easily result in the loss of his business.

A competent mechanic who works quickly, without errors is the owners best choice.

What does certification add to this except cost?

Perhaps you just have absolutely no concept of how disc brakes work, or what's involved in repairing them, but in that case you chose a poor example.

...but then, you are Larry, aren't you.

"Or a barber who has a communicable disease ....."

What is there about certification that prevents a barber from acquiring and spreading a communicable disease? Do you think barbers must undergo periodic health screening like legal prostitutes do?

You're funny, Larry.

The same self interest that protects brake shop owners, applies to barbers and their employees also.

"Or a Dentist who does have required autoclave equipment,"

Was there a point to this one?

You might be better off sticking to subjects you know something about, if there is such a thing.

 
At 7/30/2011 7:42 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

but I DO KNOW. I KNOW, for instance, that more people WANT the certification than people who don't and for you guys with minority views.. your feeble attempts at convincing others of the correctness of you views is just insults... so that tells me you really don't know nor care.. about the issue itself to start with. You just want to be your own idiot and be proud of it.

 
At 7/30/2011 8:52 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"but I DO KNOW. I KNOW, for instance, that more people WANT the certification than people who don't and for you guys with minority views."

Another pointless comment? Poor Larry. You have no idea what people want or don't want.

You should understand that most license and certification requirements are designed by those already in the business to prevent new competition. Dummies like you believe them, and parrot their claims that it's for your protection.

Competition and self interest are all the protection you need.

Learn to think for yourself.

 
At 7/30/2011 9:04 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

SOME certification / requirements ARE as you say - but others came about because people were harmed and were unable to get fair/adequate compensation.

It DOES MATTER whether you make your case to a majority of people.

You can say it doesn't matter but it does and you end up being in the minority and have to put up with things you totally don't agree with.

If you are RIGHT, then you have to convince others and you won't accomplish that with insults and hate and venom. If you are out-of-step.. and you suspect so.. then you probably just play the insult game for giggles and grins...

eh?

bottom line: if you are SERIOUS about what you say you believe in - then you try to convince/find enough others to make the changes.

I don't disagree with SOME of what you say but the rest of it I totally do not agree with and your insults only make it easier to disagree with you - and your CONTINUED insults invite tit for tat.

 
At 7/31/2011 1:00 AM, Blogger fabian hug said...

It's funny but the more they regulate and license the more crooks there is. One may say that crooks are put to light because of the rule and license requirement. I don't think so because our society lived it's best decades 60, 70, 80 and 90 without these rules. I think that when the burden becomes to heavy people will start to look for ways around and when you start, where do you stop?

 
At 7/31/2011 2:28 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"SOME certification / requirements ARE as you say - but others came about because people were harmed and were unable to get fair/adequate compensation."

You have now idea whether that's true or not. You think it sounds good, so you just pull it out of your ass.

You need to do better, Larry. No one can take your comments seriously when you just guess & provide no support.

I'm encouraged that you actually read some of the Heritage Foundation supporting material. That's a step in the right direction, however it appears that you don't understand the universally accepted statistical methods used, so you reject the report.

I understand that you must reject it on the phony pretense that it isn't factual, or else you would have to admit your initial assertion is pure bullshit.

Nice work Larry.

 
At 7/31/2011 8:46 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

SOME regulation is needed - not only in my opinion but in a majority of voters opinion who want to keep the quacks, etc, at bay.

I AGREE that in some cases we seem to have too much regulation but let me point out that many of the heralded cases these days involve things like HOAs where you WILLINGLY sign a contract to be regulated - and for the vast majority who sign for MORE regulation, they want it.

 
At 7/31/2011 11:47 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"SOME regulation is needed - not only in my opinion but in a majority of voters opinion who want to keep the quacks, etc, at bay."

You have no idea about this. I don't understand how you can keep claiming special knowledge about a majority of voters.

Do you actually believe that all government action occurs because a majority wants it? How naive.

"I AGREE that in some cases we seem to have too much regulation but let me point out that many of the heralded cases these days involve things like HOAs where you WILLINGLY sign a contract to be regulated - and for the vast majority who sign for MORE regulation, they want it."

What heralded cases? Please provide a reference or two. You aren't just making that up, are you?

HOAs are not like government regulation. Do you understand the meaning of the word 'voluntary'? You

Lastly, let's think about your statement above, which I've highlighted:

Do you think that there are a minority of people who sign up for more regulation who don't want it?

Think more carefully before you commit something silly to print.

 
At 7/31/2011 6:14 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

regulation happens because people want it... believe it.

People WILLINGLY sign HOA agreements.

People raise holy hell when some guy cheats them or builds a pig farm next to their home.

You are the one being naive,

the vast majority of laws are in reaction to some perceived wrong that legislators then react to.

that's the reality.

you just don't accept it nor do you understand that you are a small minority of folks who don't want any.

 
At 7/31/2011 6:49 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"People WILLINGLY sign HOA agreements."

That's right, Larry, that's the meaning of the word 'voluntary'. When you move into a neighborhood, you know what the CC&Rs are, and you agree to them. Everyone, not just a majority, agrees to the
them.

What heralded cases were you referring to when you said:

"...but let me point out that many of the heralded cases these days involve things like HOAs..."

You had some in mind, right? You wouldn't just make something up, would you? I'm still waiting.

 
At 7/31/2011 6:55 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

Much regulation is INSISTED ON by people who feel taken advantage of by other people.

the reason your gas pump has regulation is because without it, some would be selling .8 gallons of gas and calling it 1 gallon.

we know this from experience guy.

people want protection from other people who would take advantage of them.

You may not like this idea or even agree with it but I'm telling you the reality of why we have much of our regulation.. and it's not even based on perceived but unproven fears.. it's based on actual abuses.

that's WHERE regulation comes from.

In order for you and those who think like you to roll it back, you'll have to convince a large majority of people that regulation is NOT in their fundamental interests.

Of course.. you won't get anyone near that goal by dissing folks...but then your strategy is lame anyhow.

 
At 8/01/2011 12:06 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

Come on, Larry, don't make claims you can't support. Where are the "heralded cases"?

Answer my question, you phony little prick.

 
At 8/01/2011 9:20 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

hey airhead...did say "heralded"?

I don't think so.. got ears?

 
At 8/02/2011 6:48 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

anything that involves hygiene or the health and safety need certification IMHO.

Why? Are customers too stupid to notice that the hair dresser does not sweep the floor? Or are government inspectors so smart that they can figure out who is not complying during the periods during which they are not being watched or honest enough not to take the odd bribe when there is a legitimate problem?

the simple act of replacing your disc brakes - done wrong - by someone who does know now how to do it but did not have to be certified might change one's mind on this.

Certification is not a guarantee of competence. Only a fool would rely on it and assume that it is sufficient.

Or a barber who has a communicable disease .....

How exactly does the state ensure that a barber is free of such diseases? Do barbers have to submit blood samples where you live? How often?

then we have simple non-threatening but stealing.. like gas pumps that meter "short" or scales at the checkout "heavy weighing" your produce.

There is no need for inefficient government oversight when private bodies can do the job better and cheaper. Your coffee maker design was not reviewed and tested by the government but by UL.

 
At 8/02/2011 6:53 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

hey airhead...did say "heralded"?

I don't think so.. got ears?


I guess that this might be some other idiot Larry:

I AGREE that in some cases we seem to have too much regulation but let me point out that many of the heralded cases these days involve things like HOAs where you WILLINGLY sign a contract to be regulated - and for the vast majority who sign for MORE regulation, they want it.

 
At 8/02/2011 7:05 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

A LOT of people WANT regulation - even those who say they don't like it but let their ox get gored and they're jumping up and down about it.

The problem is that each one wants a different kind of regulation but not what the other guy wants and in the end - if enough people lobby FOR a new regulation and not as many lobby against it, it becomes a regulation.

One kid dies from bad meat and what happens? 2 kids die from bad meat and what happens? 100 kids die from bad meat and what happens?

this is what happens - ALL THE TIME.

The guy next door exercises his property rights and installs pigs... and what happens?

The medical professional that treated your wife was convicted of sexual crimes..

The peanuts you ate had bat crap in them....

the airplane you flew was using cheap Chinese replacement parts.

on and on... guy...

does preventing airlines from using cheap Chinese replacement parts drive costs up?

You bet your bottom it does.

so what?

the airline uses cheap Chinese replacement parts.. crashes the plane.. the people sue.. the company goes bankrupt...

this happens over and over....

that's why we have regulations and yes it does drive up costs - on the front end - to reduce even greater costs on the back end.

 
At 8/03/2011 2:37 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"does preventing airlines from using cheap Chinese replacement parts drive costs up?"

But there is no such preventive regulation, Larry. Can you point me to it?

"the airline uses cheap Chinese replacement parts.. crashes the plane.. the people sue.. the company goes bankrupt...

this happens over and over....
"

LOL you are such a clown.

You are really going off the rails with this stuff. Can you reference a recent instance of a plane crash caused by cheap Chinese parts? It should be easy, since it happens over and over.

Why do you think you can get by with writing such stupid things?

 
At 8/03/2011 8:14 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

it was in the news a few years back - replacement/repair parts for planes must be certified - which is expensive but it is required.

I can't help it if you are ignorant as bat crap on these issues.

I could give you a thousand regulations that come about because there is concern that without the regulation people will be harmed - and history shows - are.

THAT's WHERE regulation comes from.

If you don't understand that then you also won't understand why your anti-reg views have no import with most folks who vote and most folks that support the regs written by the people they vote into office.

I'm sorry you are so delusional that you refuse to accept basic realities but I'm getting to know you well - and you're a nut case.

 
At 8/04/2011 1:59 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"it was in the news a few years back - replacement/repair parts for planes must be certified - which is expensive but it is required."

You didn't answer my question. Does that mean you admit that what you wrote is pure bullshit?

 
At 8/04/2011 6:54 AM, Blogger VangelV said...


You didn't answer my question. Does that mean you admit that what you wrote is pure bullshit?


Of course it is bullshit. Boeing and Airbus buy high quality parts from China and use them in their products without worry. Our pal is confused by counterfeit parts made without following the exact specifications but those parts can come from anywhere, not just China. American mom and pop shops have made and sold fake washers, nuts, bolts, clips, etc., because the margins are high and there is a lot of money to be made.

 
At 8/04/2011 8:07 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

I'm pretty sure I DID answer your question Nimrod.

here's your reg:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parts_Manufacturer_Approval

and this is an example of the reason the regulations were passed:

http://www.generalaviationnews.com/2011/07/21/non-airworthy-airplane-uncertified-pilot-results-in-fatality/

Does this make airplane repair more expensive?

You bet it does.

But here's the part where you don't understand..

This reg CREATES JOBS as most regulation actually does.

Not only inspectors - but all manner of folks working for the companies themselves to insure that standards and compliance are met.

It makes the product more expensive - yes - but it's a tradeoff between high-quality and fewer accidents and higher costs.

regulations abound.

you yourself depend on them every day.

who tells the gasoline companies to put the octane on the pump and insures that the octane posted is what is actually sold?

what would keep the cheaters from putting 70 octane in the fuel and putting nothing on the pump?

what would you do if that were the case?

if you are like many folks which I grant you most certainly are not - but most folks would insist on a regulation to insure that what is being sold is the correct quality.

what keeps individual states from providing 8 foot-width interstate lanes?

regulations.

what keeps a doctor from treating you for problem that he/she is not trained in or using an x-ray machine that delivers 100 times the safe dose?

regulations.

you anti-regulation types are simpleminded fools who don't really think about the real world but instead blind ideology and the proof of that statement is in the numbers. Folks like you comprise an infinitesimally small percetage of the electorate.

so because you can't get your way... you blather... extensively... idiotically and without impact at all...

Most people want and demand regulation.

The existence of HOAs is a good indication that there are folks who will willingly agree to EVEN MORE regulation than the govt has.

Everytime there is a case - like the Anthony case.. people demand more laws... in that case.. a law to REQUIRE a parent to report a missing child within a certain number of hours.

When Allied Chemical dumped Kepone in the James River - people DEMANDED that a stop be put to it - not only there - but across the country.

when people find insects or poop in their food - they DEMAND regulation.

Your world is not their world.

your world will never be in this country.

your world is a 3rd world... where regulations are few and rarely enforced.

you're a 3rd world guy. Congrats

 
At 8/04/2011 11:20 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"here's your reg:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parts_Manufacturer_Approval
"

But this has nothing to do with cheap Chinese parts. Chinese parts are used all the time in aircraft maintenance.

"and this is an example of the reason the regulations were passed:"

But Larry, that example has nothing to do with cheap Chinese parts, or airlines, or PMA approval.

What indication is there that this happens over and over as you claim?

You can't just pull crazy things out of your ass and expect people to accept them. You really do need to confine your comments to subjects you have some knowledge. People are laughing at you, Larry.

Just admit that you can't support your bullshit claim, and we can move on.

 
At 8/04/2011 12:01 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"This reg CREATES JOBS as most regulation actually does.

Not only inspectors - but all manner of folks working for the companies themselves to insure that standards and compliance are met.
"

Oh My God! you really do need to learn some economics!

Forbidding the use of tractors on farms would create a lot of jobs also, and prevent tragedies like this one.

Do you really want to pursue this line of reasoning? think hard about it.

"regulations abound."

On that, you and I are in 100% agreement.

"what would keep the cheaters from putting 70 octane in the fuel and putting nothing on the pump?"

Well, nothing Larry, except that anyone who bought such fuel would have trouble with their car, and would never go back to that station.

Don't you think that most station operator want to to stay in business for more than a week?

Nothing on the pump? Well, for the same reason. Car owners are aware that their car requires a certain octane rated fuel, and will look for that specific number at a fueling station. They are unlikely to start pumping a mystery fuel with no octane rating number on the pump.

If you prefer wheat bread, do you ever buy generic loaves at the store that are just labelled 'bread'?

Self interest and competition for your dollars, Larry, that's what prevents cheating.

You really need to think these things through before you commit them to print for all the world to see and laugh at. Get your nanny to help you if need be.

Larry, if you insist on writing really stupid stuff like this last one, you can't complain when people point out that you really are stupid. Would you prefer that they lie to you?

 
At 8/04/2011 12:08 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"Of course it is bullshit. Boeing and Airbus buy high quality parts from China and use them in their products without worry. Our pal is confused by counterfeit parts made without following the exact specifications but those parts can come from anywhere, not just China. American mom and pop shops have made and sold fake washers, nuts, bolts, clips, etc., because the margins are high and there is a lot of money to be made."

Right, and in any case, PMA approval only shows that a manufacturer CAN make the correct part, not that they always do.

Our friend makes some naive assumptions about the value of regulation and certification.

 
At 8/04/2011 6:44 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

here you go dufus:

http://www.newser.com/story/29166/sketchy-plane-parts-for-sale-online.html

" Spare Boeing and Airbus parts of dubious origin have been found for sale on Internet sites such as Craiglist, BusinessWeek reports. The parts, including vital valves and gears, are being sold by at least 24 vendors—mainly in China and the US—without FAA approval or documentation that they've been inspected for airworthiness.

Unapproved parts being used in aircraft has plagued the FAA for years, and counterfeiters are becoming more sophisticated. The study, from a company that specializes in protecting brands, didn't discover which airlines were scouring the Internet for parts, but experts say controls are strongest in North America and Europe, and weakest in parts of Africa and Asia."

want more fool?

 
At 8/04/2011 6:46 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

" Car owners are aware that their car requires a certain octane rated fuel, and will look for that specific number at a fueling station. They are unlikely to start pumping a mystery fuel with no octane rating number on the pump."

WHY do you think the Octane rating is on the pump fool?

 
At 8/04/2011 6:49 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

" "Of course it is bullshit. Boeing and Airbus buy high quality parts from China and use them in their products without worry. Our pal is confused by counterfeit parts made without following the exact specifications but those parts can come from anywhere, not just China. American mom and pop shops have made and sold fake washers, nuts, bolts, clips, etc., because the margins are high and there is a lot of money to be made."

Right, and in any case, PMA approval only shows that a manufacturer CAN make the correct part, not that they always do."

the issue is about regulation fools.

do you think it really matters WHERE it comes from as much as it happens and the govt responds with regulations?

do you think this makes parts repair more expensive?

you bet it does.

is the regulation needed or is it another example of unneeded onerous govmint regulation?

you guys are total losers when it comes to simple logic and realities.

regulation IS NEEDED and IS EXPECTED... DEMANDED by those who would be harmed by those who would save money/make profits by selling shoddy parts that could ultimately cause deaths and injury.

this is where regulation comes from..

 
At 8/04/2011 6:53 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

re: regulation creates jobs.

well.. it DOES. That's a REALITY.

If you want better quality and quantity and safer less dangerous products.. it costs more.

airline tickets cost MORE because MORE people and resources (equipment investments) are required to produce certified parts that are often many times more expensive than "cheap" parts but the airline industry would be toast if they did not have precise and exact regulations that require (for instance) engine and chassis inspections and tear-downs per FAA ... now get this fools - R E G U L A T I O N S.

Now you fools would get rid of these regulations... and we'd have 3rd world airlines in this country.

Thank GAWD you guys comprise 1% of the electorate and live mostly under rocks.

 
At 8/04/2011 8:01 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"" Spare Boeing and Airbus parts of dubious origin have been found for sale on Internet sites such as Craiglist, BusinessWeek reports. The parts, including vital valves and gears, are being sold by at least 24 vendors—mainly in China and the US—without FAA approval or documentation that they've been inspected for airworthiness."

LOL

Larry, those are COUNTERFEIT parts. They exist despite PMA regulations. Rather than supporting your dumb initial claim, this reference shows that the regulation you admire, doesn't work. Try again.

Where are the reports of commercial airplanes crashing "over and over" due to cheap Chinese parts?

You've made no connection between faulty parts and crashes happening "over and over", and you've shown that expensive regulations have been ineffective.

Once again, you're making stuff up, and won't admit it when you're easily caught at it.

"WHY do you think the Octane rating is on the pump fool?"

Well, Larry, obviously it's on the pump because the station owner wants his customers to know which pump will provide them with the fuel they prefer.

You are getting confused by your own comments. Reread them if it will help. You asked what would happen if an operator put 70 octane in the fuel and nothing on the pump.

Here, let me quote you:

"what would keep the cheaters from putting 70 octane in the fuel and putting nothing on the pump?"

I explained it to you, and now you're trying to tell me why my answer was correct. Get a grip, Larry.

 
At 8/04/2011 8:10 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"is the regulation needed or is it another example of unneeded onerous govmint regulation?"

Well, you tell me, Larry, I thought you were going to make a case for regulation being the cure for cheap Chinese parts causing airplanes to crash over and over, and you haven't done it. You've just dredged up for some questionably related news stories that mention airplanes, but don't support your claim.

WHACK! there, got him. Where will he pop up next?

Come on, Larry, I'm ready. Surely you've got something else in that bag of yours that doesn't address the topic at hand. Let's have it.

 
At 8/04/2011 8:13 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

the R E G U L A T I O N was created IN RESPONSE to the problem.

why are you nibbling around the edges?

" Well, Larry, obviously it's on the pump because the station owner wants his customers to know which pump will provide them with the fuel they prefer. "

really? no regs? What keeps the owner from putting 87 on 84 octane fuel?

the honor system?

ha ha ha.. you're such a novel idiot.

regulations exist because of past abuses that people don't like.

your anti-regulation "shtick" is as lame as much of the rest of your blather.

Most people WANT the octane REQUIRED to be on the pump and they WANT the Octane tested and certified.

The hundreds of thousands of regulations almost always were the result of a problem that occurred FIRST when there was no regulation and then it was demanded.

I realize that you are not most people but you're also no living in the real world in much of your views... basically a reactionary right wing ideologue playing cutesy blog games.. and not much more.

 
At 8/04/2011 8:18 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

most, much, (not all) regulation is never infallible but it is successful and effective.

every industrialized country in the world has regulations.

If you think they are ineffective and result in worst outcomes then you need to find a 3rd world country more to your liking because you are a distinct minority in this country.. whose main attribute is obnoxious noise.

 
At 8/04/2011 8:31 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"Now you fools would get rid of these regulations... and we'd have 3rd world airlines in this country."

It appears that might be a good thing. See this list of airlines that have had no fatalities in the last 25 years. A pretty impressive record.

Notice that many, if not most of these are 3rd world airlines, in fact only two on the list, Hawaiian and Southwest, are US airlines.

Are those regulations you have a hard-on for saving a lot of lives compared to 3rd world airlines? Could there be other things that do more than regulations to ensure safety?

How does that foot taste, Larry?

Think before you type. Ask your nanny for help. I know she can't really help you think, but she might keep you from making such a laughingstock of yourself.

 
At 8/04/2011 8:52 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"really? no regs? What keeps the owner from putting 87 on 84 octane fuel?"

Larry....I've already explained this to you. What's your problem? Reread my previous comments or ask your nanny to read them for you and explain them in simpleton terms.

People who used 84 octane, thinking it was 87 octane, would have trouble with their cars, and would not likely go back. Reputations would be destroyed, perhaps even law suits if damage was done to cars, and the cheater would go out of business. What would be gained by this deception?

It would be even cheaper to sell water as 87 octane. What do you think - and I use that term loosely here - keeps cheaters from doing that?

You know, Larry, you're getting far off topic here. I asked you to support your claim that government regulation of airplane parts was necessary to prevent planes from crashing, something you claim happens over and over, due to the use of cheap Chinese parts.

I recognized a bullshit comment when I saw it, and I asked you to support it. You haven't done it, because you can't.

Responding with a lot of irrelevant other stuff doesn't help you. Just address the issue at hand, Larry.

Whack! Oh wow. I didn't expect him way over there. Come on, Larry, I'm ready again. Pop up somewhere.

 
At 8/04/2011 9:31 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

" something you claim happens over and over, due to the use of cheap Chinese parts. "

show me where I said this?

I'm pretty sure this is YOUR lame extrapolation.

The vast, vast majority of regulations are needed and supported by the vast majority of people in a representative govt.

the fact that you don't and propagandize and lie about it only reflects on you my friend.

my basic statement.. whether it involves Chinese parts or airplane safety or octane or thousands of other things is that most of it came about AFTER there were abuses and AFTER people wanted it...

Most people WANT regulation even as they complain about it.

as soon as their particular ox gets gored.. they're on board with big daddy govt going after them.

and yes regulation DOES cost money up front - but it often saves money downstream.

it's just one of the famous butt-wipes that the right wing loves to sniff.

 
At 8/04/2011 9:38 PM, Blogger Larry G said...

" ..I've already explained this to you"

you "explain" a lot but almost all of it is grade A blather and BS for sure.

an "explanation" from you is like stepping on chewing gum on a hot day.

 
At 8/04/2011 11:50 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

" something you claim happens over and over, due to the use of cheap Chinese parts. "

show me where I said this?
"

Well, you only have to reread your own comments on this thread, Larry, it's that easy. If you didn't think you said it, why did you go on for so long defending it, you dumb shit?

Here it is anyway.

"the airline uses cheap Chinese replacement parts.. crashes the plane.. the people sue.. the company goes bankrupt...

this happens over and over....
"

You haven't provided any hint of support, and now you don't remember writing it.

You are such a clown.

By the way, speaking of things you don't remember writing, where are the "many of the heralded cases" I asked you for?

Does it really not embarrass you to say stupid things that you know you can't support, and then say you don't remember saying them?

Is your nanny still there, or did she give up trying to help you?

Whack! There's another. I just knew you would pop up there sooner or later. I was ready. Come on, Larry, let's keep playing. This is great practice.

 
At 8/04/2011 11:51 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"an "explanation" from you is like stepping on chewing gum on a hot day."

What does this even mean, Larry? Are you on drugs, or what?

 
At 8/05/2011 7:29 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

Don't you think that most station operator want to to stay in business for more than a week?

Nothing on the pump? Well, for the same reason. Car owners are aware that their car requires a certain octane rated fuel, and will look for that specific number at a fueling station. They are unlikely to start pumping a mystery fuel with no octane rating number on the pump.

If you prefer wheat bread, do you ever buy generic loaves at the store that are just labelled 'bread'?

Self interest and competition for your dollars, Larry, that's what prevents cheating.

You really need to think these things through before you commit them to print for all the world to see and laugh at. Get your nanny to help you if need be.

Larry, if you insist on writing really stupid stuff like this last one, you can't complain when people point out that you really are stupid. Would you prefer that they lie to you?


Our pal does not seem capable of understanding economics. I doubt that he can ever learn.

 
At 8/05/2011 7:36 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

Unapproved parts being used in aircraft has plagued the FAA for years, and counterfeiters are becoming more sophisticated. The study, from a company that specializes in protecting brands, didn't discover which airlines were scouring the Internet for parts, but experts say controls are strongest in North America and Europe, and weakest in parts of Africa and Asia.

This is nothing new dumbdumb. Companies have been making parts for years, even if they were not approved by the original manufacturer. Airlines have procedures to ensure that they only use parts that are in compliance. If they have problems they lose customers and wind up in bankruptcy.

 
At 8/05/2011 7:36 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

I'm pretty sure I DID answer your question Nimrod.

here's your reg:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parts_Manufacturer_Approval

and this is an example of the reason the regulations were passed:

http://www.generalaviationnews.com/2011/07/21/non-airworthy-airplane-uncertified-pilot-results-in-fatality/


Do you read your own citations dumbdumb? You referenced an accident report that cites an accident caused by an uncertified pilot flying an unairworthy plane. There is no mention of parts that were not to specification because they were purchased from an unqualified supplier.

Does this make airplane repair more expensive?

You bet it does.

But here's the part where you don't understand..

This reg CREATES JOBS as most regulation actually does.


Since you like to use Wikipedia try searching for the Broken Window Fallacy and learn dumbdumb.

 
At 8/05/2011 7:37 AM, Blogger VangelV said...


WHY do you think the Octane rating is on the pump fool?


Because consumers want to know what they are buying. They would be posted without any regulatory requirement.

 
At 8/05/2011 7:39 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

really? no regs? What keeps the owner from putting 87 on 84 octane fuel?

the honor system?


There are laws against fraud dumbdumb. You don't need any other regulations. And what keeps that owner from cheating is a desire to stay in business.

 
At 8/05/2011 7:47 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

" Well, you only have to reread your own comments on this thread,"

" "the airline uses cheap Chinese replacement parts.. crashes the plane.. the people sue.. the company goes bankrupt."

so once again you lied and misrepresented the truth...

you are one lame butt dumbass

a person like yourself who cannot deal with the truth and repeatedly CHOOSES to lie and misrepresent the truth and the facts is typical of the right wing idiots running around now days,.

you fit the picture ...

but as long as you are here, I'm gonna be on you.. every lie, every misrepresentation, ever insult.. you're going to get it right back in your sorry face.

the reason we have problems in our world is people like you who have the mindset of a 2yr old.

 
At 8/05/2011 7:48 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

show me where I said this?

I'm pretty sure this is YOUR lame extrapolation.


Here you go. I think that it is your lame writing. And if you did not intend to make the point you had the opportunity to correct the interpretation. You didn't until you were called up on it and could not support your claims.

does preventing airlines from using cheap Chinese replacement parts drive costs up?

You bet your bottom it does.

so what?

the airline uses cheap Chinese replacement parts.. crashes the plane.. the people sue.. the company goes bankrupt...

this happens over and over....

that's why we have regulations and yes it does drive up costs - on the front end - to reduce even greater costs on the back end.


On this issue you have no idea what you are talking about. As I pointed out, Boeing, Bombardier, and Airbus have certified Chinese manufacturers and buy high quality parts from competent Chinese manufacturers. Where the parts come from does not matter. What matters is that parts are to specification. The regulations do not ensure that all parts that go into an airplane are to spec. Only the operators can do that.

 
At 8/05/2011 7:51 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

and yes regulation DOES cost money up front - but it often saves money downstream.

No, it does not. Compliance costs are very high and effectiveness is marginal at best. Even the FAA knows this because it has made efforts to streamline and modernize the compliance process.

 
At 8/05/2011 7:55 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

what utter fools you folks are:

" Nothing on the pump? Well, for the same reason. Car owners are aware that their car requires a certain octane rated fuel, and will look for that specific number at a fueling station. They are unlikely to start pumping a mystery fuel with no octane rating number on the pump."

If the law does not require posting the info do you think the TRUE OCTANE would be posted by every operator?

how would you know what they posted was not a bald faced lie much like you guys operate?

stupid stuff?

stupid is as stupid does with you lame butts...

you can't deal with the real world that IS REGULATED - ON PURPOSE - and SUPPORTED by a sold majority in a representative government.

Without significant regulation, we'd have people sickened and dead from bad food and drugs. We'd have Love Canals and Kepone in rivers... we'd have planes routinely using cheap parts and pilots with claimed but not certified skills..

you folks just your typical run of the road ideological mean-spirited idiots.

read that slowly to get the full meaning ...

as long as you are here.. I'll be here and on your sorry butts every time you lie or misrepresent the facts... get used to it.

the only way to deal with types like you if to give it right back to you.

 
At 8/05/2011 8:01 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

" On this issue you have no idea what you are talking about. As I pointed out"

" as I pointed out"..

nope.. more lies and idiocy from you.

they use certified parts because they are REQUIRED TO by law and regulation and there are FAA inspectors and agents to assure compliance.

"cheap chinese parts" is a documented problem.. but they are representative of a bigger program which is - without regulations and enforcement... such parts will find their way onto the market .. undetected if you don't have inspectors and unregulated without regs that specify standards.

for someone who spends much of his time saying "you have no idea" to others in insulting fashion - you yourself are one ignorant fool on most of these issues yourself.

a blowhard.. met you in school..know your type...

 
At 8/05/2011 8:02 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

a person like yourself who cannot deal with the truth and repeatedly CHOOSES to lie and misrepresent the truth and the facts is typical of the right wing idiots running around now days,.

The words cited were written by you, not me. For some reason you fail to remember ever having written them.

 
At 8/05/2011 8:04 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

" and yes regulation DOES cost money up front - but it often saves money downstream.

No, it does not. Compliance costs are very high and effectiveness is marginal at best. Even the FAA knows this because it has made efforts to streamline and modernize the compliance process. "

prove it.

show me where regulation costs more than the damage it prevents.

you don't know bat guano.

we ALWAYS want to reduce overhead and make it more efficient JUST LIKE WE WANT ANY productive activity - both public AND private sector to do.

you use that canard as a rationale to not have ANY regulation .. more right wing zealotry....for sure...

 
At 8/05/2011 8:04 AM, Blogger VangelV said...


If the law does not require posting the info do you think the TRUE OCTANE would be posted by every operator?


No. But those that did not post it would soon be out of business because people are not as stupid as you think that they are. It is only people as stupid as you are that needs regulations because they are incapable of thinking for themselves. Fortunately there don't seem to be that many people as dumb as you are.

 
At 8/05/2011 8:06 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

nope.. more lies and idiocy from you.

they use certified parts because they are REQUIRED TO by law and regulation and there are FAA inspectors and agents to assure compliance.


No. They use certified parts because as manufacturers they have to ensure that the product that they sell meet the specifications that they promised to deliver to the airlines.

 
At 8/05/2011 8:11 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

"cheap chinese parts" is a documented problem.. but they are representative of a bigger progrm which is - without regulations and enforcement... such parts will find their way onto the market .. undetected if you don't have inspectors and unregulated without regs that specify standards.

There you go again. You are just as likely to get cheap parts from a machine shop in Ohio or Quebec than you are from Shaangxi. The problem is out of specification parts, not origin. Many shops that used to make parts for Boeing or Airbus continue to make those same parts long after they lose the contracts because the spares market is very lucrative and they know all of the requirements necessary to make detection difficult. Of course, as long as the parts meet requirements there is no problem with their use from a technical perspective but that is an argument for another thread and probably beyond your comprehension.

 
At 8/05/2011 8:16 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

prove it.

show me where regulation costs more than the damage it prevents.


Right after you support your claim that it saves money. Of course, you can get a good start by looking at the impact of deregulation on the price of flying. Adjusted for inflation the price of an airline ticket fell by around 40%.

 
At 8/05/2011 8:17 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

read for content fool:

http://www.newser.com/story/29166/sketchy-plane-parts-for-sale-online.html

" The parts, including vital valves and gears, are being sold by at least 24 vendors—mainly in China and the US—without FAA approval or documentation that they've been inspected for airworthiness"

 
At 8/05/2011 8:22 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

" show me where regulation costs more than the damage it prevents.

Right after you support your claim that it saves money. Of course, you can get a good start by looking at the impact of deregulation on the price of flying. Adjusted for inflation the price of an airline ticket fell by around 40%. "

Often ..proposed regulations DO REQUIRE a cost-benefit study - WHICH I DO SUPPORT,

The problem with your lame-butt idiocy is that you don't say that SOME regulation is needed and give examples and that some is unnecessary and provide a convincing case why it's not..

you just say that any/all regulation is wrong/bad and then attack anyone who disagrees with that position,

where did you get your all or nothing proposition from anyhow?

and you PROVED to me your IGNORANCE and right wing propaganda pandering behavior when it became apparent that you don't know shit from shinnola with respect to how SS and Medicare operate...

You parrot.. almost word-for-word the propaganda and disinformation spewed out by the ideologues,

So you are:

1. Ignorant
2. too lazy to do your own due dilgence

3. addled-brained enough to buy propaganda and disinformation without using critical reasoning

4. more than willing to parrot what you've heard

that's 4 strikes Elmer..

put on the dunce hat and go to the corner.

 
At 8/05/2011 1:11 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

" The parts, including vital valves and gears, are being sold by at least 24 vendors—mainly in China and the US—without FAA approval or documentation that they've been inspected for airworthiness"

You're repeating yourself, Larry, your short memory and inability to focus is astounding.

I explained to you already that this article is about counterfeit parts. The article acknowledges that there are no indication any such part has been defective or caused a problem, only that they lack documentation.. This isn't support for anything you have asserted.

The article goes on to explain that it isn't even known what airlines, if any, have bought or used such parts, only that the parts exist.

Notice the highlighting above.

Do you even recall what your original point was? Your persistence in throwing up responses and references that don't support your contentions, without the slightest hint of embarrassment, is truly remarkable.

 
At 8/05/2011 1:18 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"The problem with your lame-butt idiocy is that you don't say that SOME regulation is needed and give examples and that some is unnecessary and provide a convincing case why it's not..

you just say that any/all regulation is wrong/bad and then attack anyone who disagrees with that position,

where did you get your all or nothing proposition from anyhow?

and you PROVED to me your IGNORANCE and right wing propaganda pandering behavior when it became apparent that you don't know shit from shinnola with respect to how SS and Medicare operate...

You parrot.. almost word-for-word the propaganda and disinformation spewed out by the ideologues,

So you are:

1. Ignorant
2. too lazy to do your own due dilgence

3. addled-brained enough to buy propaganda and disinformation without using critical reasoning

4. more than willing to parrot what you've heard

that's 4 strikes Elmer..

put on the dunce hat and go to the corner.
"

This is just meaningless nonsense, Larry. Are you finished addressing the issue of defective airplane parts or their impact on safety?

Now that everything you have written about the subject has been debunked, are you out of gas? Is there anything you can contribute, or is it all childish whining?

 
At 8/05/2011 1:25 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

"There you go again. You are just as likely to get cheap parts from a machine shop in Ohio or Quebec than you are from Shaangxi. The problem is out of specification parts, not origin. "

Larry doesn't want to hear about this important distinction.

He has covered his ears and closed his eyes tight shut, and he's chanting "nya, nya, you're a poopoo butt".

He refuses to consider anything that might upset his tiny view of the world. It's truly a sad thing to see.

 
At 8/05/2011 5:40 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

Often ..proposed regulations DO REQUIRE a cost-benefit study - WHICH I DO SUPPORT,

You asked my idiot friend and I answered. You have never supported your claims. For my part I simply pointed to what happened after deregulation of the airline industry. Costs fell and tickets declined by 40%. It was the regulations that were keeping prices high and were ripping off consumers. The same was true in telephone land lines and cell phones. Deregulation meant lower prices, better service, and more innovation. (And more jobs.)

 
At 8/06/2011 7:16 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

here's what the article says dumbass:

" Unapproved parts being used in aircraft has plagued the FAA for years"

now your myopic pea brain may not understand the word "plagued" but most normal people do.

you're sick man,

 
At 8/06/2011 7:21 AM, Blogger Larry G said...

regulation works. Not 100% of the time and sometimes not at all but over the spectrum - it is effective at what it does.

If it was not - then 3rd world countries without it or much of it would be economic powerhouses and submerge the industrialized countries.

Most normal people understand this.

Most normal people WANT ... the FAA...for instance.. to have regulations that deal with aircraft parts.

most people who get on airliners SUPPORT the regulations and are glad they are there.

there are a minority of fools in this country - you are two of them that refuse to acknowledge that even SOME regulation is required.

that's fine. People can disagree.

but the WAY you two disagree is the problem.

you're both your basic arrogant ideological idiots who exist in your own little nether world.

 
At 8/06/2011 1:57 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

You know, there IS one regulation I could support whole-heartedly, and that is one requiring that anyone who buys a home computer and has internet access, must prove they have a minimum of logical thinking ability before they are permitted to comment on blogs.

Based on that premise, Larry, I would suggest that, assuming you have saved the packing material yours came in, that you carefully disconnect all cords, coil them carefully, and as much as possible, repack your computer in that original packing material.

You should then take it to the store where you bought it, and ask for a refund. When you are asked why you are returning it, you should reply: "I'm too fucking stupid to own a computer."

 
At 8/08/2011 10:01 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

now your myopic pea brain may not understand the word "plagued" but most normal people do.

you're sick man,


The point is valid. There are regulations yet the problem persists. But note that there have been very few fatalities and that only a small percentage of those have had anything to do with illegal Chinese parts.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home