Hell, this is going to be a long one ;) I have neither the HTML skills, nor time to nicely format, so I’ll do my best to break it down by reply
Background on my formatting:I started using Netscape many moons ago. It ran it's course and died. Netscape 7.2 was it's pinnacle. What I liked about it, was that it had an HTML generator inside. You could click on the composer, up would pop a clean sheet, and you could type in there like you would use a word processor. You could highlight, format, do just about anything you would do with a word processor, and then when you were done, you'd hit another button, and it would display the HTML version. You could then highlight that, copy it, and paste it in the Free Republic response/comment window. Then you could review, change if need be, and then hit post.
Netscape was sold to AOL. They let it die, so I moved to FireFox. It didn't have a composer, so I searched and found a product called Kompozer. Kompozer is the TEXT/HTML editor that most closely resembles the editor that Netscape had. I now use that.
I do know a fair amount of HTML, but not enough to do all the things I do. If you want to download Kompozer and use it, it's free.
I personally like to use different colors, for several reasons. 1. I often address only parts of a post to me, leaving important issues unadddressed. By putting what I am responding to right above my own, I can address all the things a person has said in such a manner as to make it real easy to follow. 2. I don't do it to be long winded, or discourage others from responding. 3. I just want someone coming along and seeing my response, to be able to follow exactly what was said and responded to, without having to click back and forth to follow along.
Pre:
That’s presuming the monopoly granted ensures the task at hand (operation, Rx, etc.). And, you’ll have to concur that problems STILL arise w/ ‘gov’t oversight’ (malpractice, wrong scripts...); doesn’t mean it’s worth a hill of beans. What it DOES do, is keep the customers in-the-dark (expecting the ‘system’ to weed out the ‘bad’), and keep those with a penchant in those fields from ‘rocking the boat’. IE: Einstein would have been a bad math teacher ‘cause he didn’t have his certification??
1) Either the gov’t has that authority, or it does not. Sorry, it’s not a ‘in this case, yes, in others, no’.
2) See #1
I'm not against private sector remedies for things that go bump in the night. Fact of the matter is, you need an agency with teeth, and the willingness to take people to task. Bad pharmacists, techs, physicians, attornies... you name it. People do bad things, they lose their ability to hold a license. This keeps them from continuing to harm the public. If you have a better way to achieve this, I don't mind the suggestion.
2a) You really think mom/pop, to make a few extra $$ would jeopardize their vehicle, insurance rates, let alone word-of-mouth for their customers enough to REQUIRE a gov’t monopoly??
No I don't. If you think all taxis (if that's what we're discussing), are run by moms and pops, I think you're off base there. There are evil players out there. They rip people off. If they are not properly licensed and regulated, it's like a license to steal. They get caught, they give up the burner car, get another and use it until they get caught again. They can use different drivers, different cars, operate out of different offices every few weeks. This needs to be regulated. In big cities, you have too many people exposed to crooks, if you don't.
‘Underage drinking’...only a problem in the U.S. (and that can be left up to the BIZ to enforce...it does NOT require a liquor license).
Why would a business enforce anything? (...industry if you will...) If the government wasn't going to get involved, there would be no reason to enforce.
Any co. would be penny wise pound foolish to sink MILLIONS into XYZ w/out validation re: impact studies. As if it takes the Army Corp of Engineers to get it ‘right’. The lawsuits and bad publicity alone could shut their doors. Just look at the super fund clean-up sites...OK’d by gov’t one day, ‘outlawed’ the next
I think it's a valid beef that the government allows these sites to fester, and then carps about it after the fact. Just because the government is doing a crappy job of policing, it doesn't mean it was a rotten idea to begin with. It simply means the government is not doing it's job.
3) No, I asked how, aside from the ineffective, broke and Unconstitutional SS (numer), how does not validate a prospective employee?? Let’s say they didn’t HAVE a passport, no drivers license (big city living). We already know the SSN wasn’t designed for identity, let alone the fraud already inherit in the system. When did it become ‘papers, please’ in the U.S.?
4) Vested interest or not, those jobs are NOT anyone’s BUT the employer (they pay the taxes, paycheck, etc.). Again, WHO, and by what authority, gives this ‘approved work force’??
The federal government is tasked with preventing the states from being invaded. It has fallen down on the job. Part of it's efforts to stop foreign nationals from being able to live here and earn a living here, hinges on them being denied the ability to work here. It is a legitimate job of the federal government to deny foreign nationals access to jobs. If you want to spin that as the government being out of control, I'm not going to join you.
4a) Reasonable requirement? Gov’t would same the same for the reams of regs, rules, Laws on the books. Let alone, in this instance, making all FREE Citizens a # in some gov’t DB...that’s not FREE anymore.
Frankly, I'm not a big fan of driver's licenses. I'm not particularly a big fan of social security numbers either. It's the system we have set up now. It's there, and until we get immigration under control, I see no problem with utilizing it. I don't see abuse of a business or a citizen, if a job is denied to an illegal alien. If you wish to address other issues, then that's fair game too. To address some of this, you'd have to address a myriad of different programs, and alleviate the problems rolling back would have. For instance, if we have no Driver's Licenses or Social Security numbers, how do we manage Social Security fund accumulation? The short answer is, we wouldn't. Until such a time as we have an alternative to SS, we need to keep what we have in place.
4b) Again, you propose it’s the gov’t position to ensure all Citizens are ‘valid to work’. Let’s not even go into them NOT enforcing the borders as it is, but, instead, heaping more B.S. upon biz and Citizens. Biz should be as much border enforcement as it is tax collector...that being ZERO.
You're acting as if this is going to be a big burden on an employer. How long would it take to put in a number and see who pops up? Two minutes? Is that really a game changer in your opinion? As for saying which Citizen can work, I haven't made any claims about citizens. It's illegal immigrants I'm trying to avoid giving our jobs to.
4c) “Would it have to? No.” Not sure which party you’re talking about here :)
Look, if you want to infer I am a Democrat because I want illegal immigration done away with, so be it. Our leaders swear an oath to protect the states from invasion. I think it's wise to demand they do it.
As for border enforcement, I'm all for beefing that up. We should make it cyrstal clear that it is going to get very difficult to survive in the United States if you're an illegally existing foreign national on U. S. soil.
4d) The ‘tool’ in that case is ENFORCE THE CURRENT LAW(S) and REMOVE THE NANNY STATE/SECURITY NET....it’s not authorized by A1S8, and creates the carrot to break the law.
4e) Little over the top, but I’ll let is slide :P Yes, they only have the basics. Now, as to ‘no individual is harmed...’ What if I didn’t WANT it? What if I never signed up FOR it (is it now MANDATORY in the land of the Free?) You give gov’t authority it does not possess....Why not just implant at birth all ‘valid’ Citizens; then gov’t will make sure you can work, get paid, see the doc, etc.
I have the beginnings of a plan to completely revamp our retirement system in the United States. I would within a few decades completely remove the federal government from entering into that subject matter. It would also allow people to self-insure themselves in ways they haven't been able to for the most part. I would like to see, vehicle, health care, house-hold, belonging, dental, vision, and perhaps a few more things taken care of by individuals themselves. Insurance policies with large deductables would be available to take care of catastrophic situations out of the individual's control. Other than that, a savings fund would build up using compound interest, and under a tax qualified account. People would be assisted in building up large sums of money in short order. This they could use to purchase a home in time. The whole thing would be geared around building assets over the persons working years.
I think it would be a great idea of a fund were set up, that would help people when they enter the job market, to have enough money to self-insure from the start, paying back the funds at a low interest rate, then continuing to build up funds they would have spent on insurance under the plans we have today. Employers would shift some of their former tax contributions to the employee. A massive fund would build up, so that business could borrow from it at rates hihger than normal, but not to exorbitant. This would allow people who had funds in the sytem, to grow their money rather rapidly.
If this were drawn up in a reasonable manner, the government would be out of the retirement and end of life medical coverage business. People would self-insure, and use catastrophic coverage to take care of things they couldn't.
Now, introduce a national sales tax to the mix, and there would be no need to have a Social Security number any longer. Each individual would no longer be under the thumb of the federal or state governments.
Something like this would have to take place before you could do away with the social security system as we know it today.
Sorry, but you give gov’t more authority than it has, or deserves. Business is there to make a profit, make a product/provide a service. It’s NOT there to collect taxes for the gov’t, ensure gov’t didn’t let XYZ slip over the border, make sure their employees pay their bills on time, see the dentist every 6 months, etc.
Believe it or not, businesses can still turn a profit employing citizens. Verifying a Social Security number is not going to put any business out of business, unless it has been using illegal immigrants in it's business model.