Cass Sustein: Will he be voted in?

[il Padrino Ute]

I wonder how Utah will feel about Orin Hatch's withdrawl??

Like all politicians, Hatch is more concerned about his career than anything else. Withdrawing his name from holding up this nomination appeases the Dems and makes them more willing to work with him. And when election time comes, he'll tell the voters that he tried in vain to do what he could to stop it, if that's what they want to hear and the voters will be dumb enough to vote him in again because the general populace just doesn't care enough to really get involved so the status quo is good enough for them.

[il Padrino Ute]

Do you recognize that government, however minimal, is required for a society to enjoy liberty?

If you mean keeping those who would harm society off the streets, I can see that it's needed to enjoy liberty, but I don't see how it creates liberty, as Sustein suggests.

[dabrockster]

Your talking about taxes in addition to those required to guarantee the "positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges." I'm not. How can those rights and privileges that comprise liberty be guaranteed without taxes?

Oh I understood what you meant I was just changing the topic a little.

I think you are right on the taxes thing.. So, now that liberty is tied to taxes, can a type of decision that I disagree with infringe on what I wanted for my country and what I consider to be my Liberties..

[dabrockster]

I'm in Dayton. It doesn't bother me at all. The POTUS has significant freedom guaranteed by the constitution to appoint whom he chooses and I haven't seen a persuasive argument that Sunstein would be unfit for the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

Do you have any?

To best respond to this is to ask another question (Sorry). This position Cass will be getting is new correct?? There has not been a regulatory Czar in the past has there?

If so, I do have major reservations with having one single person having the authority beyond legislation to tweak any laws that are currently in place. No person should have such power and he being in this position scares me.

In addition his views on Dog's needing a lawyer etc is looney in my opinion and I wonder what else he thinks that he has not outwardly spoken about.

To me doesn't this position take over what our congressman etc are supposed to do??

[YOhio]

To best respond to this is to ask another question (Sorry). This position Cass will be getting is new correct?? There has not been a regulatory Czar in the past has there?

If so, I do have major reservations with having one single person having the authority beyond legislation to tweak any laws that are currently in place. No person should have such power and he being in this position scares me.

In addition his views on Dog's needing a lawyer etc is looney in my opinion and I wonder what else he thinks that he has not outwardly spoken about.

To me doesn't this position take over what our congressman etc are supposed to do??

No. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs was created in the Reagan administration. Sunstein is not nominated as a Czar, rather an Administrator. Hence the requirement of Senate approval.

His views on animal rights are pretty extreme, but I don't see how they pertain to this position. I also doubt that he has a whole lot of thoughts that have been withheld. Most law students in the past ten to fifteen have studied Constitutional Law from a Cass Sunstein textbook. He's a very well respected legal mind and will probably be quite capable in this position.

[YOhio]

If you mean keeping those who would harm society off the streets, I can see that it's needed to enjoy liberty, but I don't see how it creates liberty, as Sustein suggests.

What's the difference between create and enjoy?

[dabrockster]

No. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs was created in the Reagan administration. Sunstein is not nominated as a Czar, rather an Administrator. Hence the requirement of Senate approval.

His views on animal rights are pretty extreme, but I don't see how they pertain to this position. I also doubt that he has a whole lot of thoughts that have been withheld. Most law students in the past ten to fifteen have studied Constitutional Law from a Cass Sunstein textbook. He's a very well respected legal mind and will probably be quite capable in this position.

I have concerns for our Agriculture and livestock businesses if he starts to evoke such opinions into his position...

[il Padrino Ute]

What's the difference between create and enjoy?

In this sense the difference would be that create means that liberty is the result of the government not interfering with the lives of the citizens. Enjoy means being able to exercise that liberty.

Perhaps you could explain how taxes create liberty.

[YOhio]

In this sense the difference would be that create means that liberty is the result of the government not interfering with the lives of the citizens. Enjoy means being able to exercise that liberty.

Perhaps you could explain how taxes create liberty.

Your distinction is unsatisfying. I don't see a real difference.

Taxation is required to maintain a government. At the very minimum, a government has the role of enforcing contracts, enforcing criminal law, and protecting it's citizens. Without those basic protections guaranteed, the citizen has no liberty. The citizen cannot safely purchase property, enter into business transactions or ensure physical safety of self and property from foreign or domestic invasion.

[YOhio]

I have concerns for our Agriculture and livestock businesses if he starts to evoke such opinions into his position...

Can you further explain how the Administrator of The White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs can functionally 'evoke opinions' that would harm our nations' Ag sector? I'm curious about this.

[il Padrino Ute]

Your distinction is unsatisfying. I don't see a real difference.

Taxation is required to maintain a government. At the very minimum, a government has the role of enforcing contracts, enforcing criminal law, and protecting it's citizens. Without those basic protections guaranteed, the citizen has no liberty. The citizen cannot safely purchase property, enter into business transactions or ensure physical safety of self and property from foreign or domestic invasion.

I'm sorry my distinction doesn't satisfy what you're asking. I really don't think I could explain it any better than I did.

Are you saying that individuals are basically evil and seek to harm others without government intervention? Is that why citizens would have no liberty?

[YOhio]

Are you saying that individuals are basically evil and seek to harm others without government intervention?

I don't need to say what thousands of years of history has proven.

[il Padrino Ute]

I don't need to say what thousands of years of history has proven.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing about the nature of man, but I can't agree that enforcing limitations on society is liberty.

If I somehow found myself in isolation - we can use the cliche shipwrecked on an island - where there is sufficient resources to survive, I would experience true liberty. In fact, I wouldn't need resources to experience liberty. It would be tough to live, but I'd be free.

In the house I lived in before this in, I wanted to build a greenhouse in the backyard so my wife could raise the flowers that she wanted without having to buy them from a nursery. My request was rejected by the city because it's against the law because the city considered a greenhouse a commercial building and zoning doesn't allow commercial buildings in residential areas.

How did taxes created liberty for me in this case? I believe that the taxes I paid in that city were used to restrict my liberty, as I was not allowed to build the greenhouse.

[YOhio]

If I somehow found myself in isolation - we can use the cliche shipwrecked on an island - where there is sufficient resources to survive, I would experience true liberty.

Okay. With the exception of IPU living on a stranded island, the protection of a taxpayer funded government is required for liberty. I'm happy with that conclusion.

In the house I lived in before this in, I wanted to build a greenhouse in the backyard so my wife could raise the flowers that she wanted without having to buy them from a nursery. My request was rejected by the city because it's against the law because the city considered a greenhouse a commercial building and zoning doesn't allow commercial buildings in residential areas.

How did taxes created liberty for me in this case? I believe that the taxes I paid in that city were used to restrict my liberty, as I was not allowed to build the greenhouse.

I missed the part where he said that all taxes are necessary for liberty. Perhaps you can find that for me.

[il Padrino Ute]

Okay. With the exception of IPU living on a stranded island, the protection of a taxpayer funded government is required for liberty. I'm happy with that conclusion.



I missed the part where he said that all taxes are necessary for liberty. Perhaps you can find that for me.

His exact quote is "Without taxes, there would be no liberty."