The Ever-Expanding Overreach of the Nanny State

ColonelHaiku

True Classic
Where does this power come from? Where is it going? We seem to have an entrenched (burrowed in?) bureaucracy that has no interest in cost-cutting... certainly no interest in reducing its size... no interest in being paid for performance... protected by civil service protections and - to a great extent - by our judicial system... and its reach grows and grows...

'The Obama administration is setting new workplace regulations to assist foreign workers who fill goat herding positions in the U.S., including employee-paid cell phones and comfy beds.

These new special procedures issued by the Labor Department must be followed by employers who want to hire temporary agricultural foreign workers to perform sheep herding or goat herding activities. It describes strict rules for sleeping quarters, lighting, food storage, bathing, laundry, cooking and new rules for the counters where food is prepared.

“A separate sleeping unit shall be provided for each person, except in a family arrangement,” says the rules signed by Jane Oates, assistant secretary for employment and training administration at the Labor Department.

“Such a unit shall include a comfortable bed, cot or bunk, with a clean mattress,” the rules state.

Diane Katz, a research fellow in regulatory policy at The Heritage Foundation, unearthed the policy in the "Federal Register​," the massive daily journal of proposed regulations that Washington bureaucrats publish every day.

Under the Obama Administration, the nanny state has imposed 75 new major regulations with annual costs of $38 billion.

“This captures what is wrong with government,” Katz said. “I could not have made this up.” '

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45722


"As parents across the country prepare to send their children back to school, the all-important question, “What should I put in the lunchbox?” looms. And the federal government just might have something to say about that.

For example, you might not want to pack PB&J. Although it's a perennial favorite of kids and parents, an overzealous cadre of federal regulators has just issued proposed “guidelines” for youth nutrition that put peanut butter on a lengthy list of foods deemed unacceptable to market to children and, therefore, possibly unacceptable to be served in schools.


This Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children (IWG), comprised of the US Department of Agriculture, the Federal Trade Commission, the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control, was charged by Congress with the task of studying the issue of childhood obesity and the marketing of foods to children and adolescents. It proposed “voluntary” guidelines now being considered that will undermine parental authority, place a so-called “voluntary” marketing ban on the marketing of numerous healthy foods like cereals and yogurts to children, and inflict economic harm on American consumers, American agriculture and the food industry, among many other sectors of the American economy."

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/178017-the-slippery-slope-of-voluntary-guidelines
 
I find it quite hilarious that this post complains about government intervention and regulation, when just yesterday you were decrying the lack of regulation that allowed a partnership with the Chinese. Vacillate much?
 
Lack of regulation?

Hey, business is free to do what it wants... to a certain extent. My point was how Jeffery Immelt - Obama's favorite corporate butt-buddy and chair of his Council on Competitiveness and Job Growth - chose to get in bed with the ChiComs and help them to grow their economy and create jobs for the Chinese... let alone share GE's intellectual property and help the Chinese to undercut one of America's large, iconic, corporate employers (Boeing.. . the same Boeing that the NLRB is trying to prevent from moving to South Carolina) and help the Chinese military grow stronger and stronger... you don't find the humor in that?

Neither do I.
 
Last edited:
To a certain extent?

Well that is the issue isn't it? What extent? The one you favor? Great! Go and get the government you want to give that. Either you want free unfettered enterprise or you don't. If you want it fettered to any extent whatever then how is the extent determined?

Other than the Immelt thing being one more example of something you don't like about Obama-how is it any different from any other corportion offshoring whatever they offshore. Are you saying that only friends of Obama should be restricted in their business abroad? Are you saying that a certain class of products shouldn't be part of deals with China? Who decides? You?
 
Sheesh

Hey... it's the President's Council on Competitiveness and Jobs... which is supposed to be doing something about creating jobs in this country... not killing them.

You mean to say it was only lip service? :lol:
 
Of course it was only lip service...

what planet do you come from? If there was a practical way to bring all the money sitting in corporate coffers together with all the employable people in the country in a profitable way, it would be happening, Job Commission be hanged.
And it is not necessarily the case that improving business in China won't create jobs here-you have no way of knowing that either in a general or specific sense.
 
whew... aren't you

the cynical one... it's totally in Immelt's character, since he was the same maroon holding hands with the Iranians until GE shareholders got wind of it.
 
That's big business guys for you!

That's the class of dudes there is so much enthusiasm about turning our whole national life over to. They are what they are. They do what they do and they are all pretty much the same at the core.
 
LOL, I love reading these shooting matches. Problem is my popcorn bill has tripled. Thanks :whistle:
 
It's just that most of these so-called "conservatives" are complicit in the passage of myriad legislation that continuously expands the nanny state.

The biggest recent example was the addition of the prescription drug benefit to Medicare.

There is an old saying for this kind of behavior....the pot calling the kettle black.
 
Good point

It's just that most of these so-called "conservatives" are complicit in the passage of myriad legislation that continuously expands the nanny state.

The biggest recent example was the addition of the prescription drug benefit to Medicare.

There is an old saying for this kind of behavior....the pot calling the kettle black.

about the Medicare PDB, I wouldn't defend that. Hopefully, Republicans will either do away with it, or modify it, in 2013.

I only noted a few examples of this nanny-state expansionism. It most certainly isn't limited to the Left, as your example shows. One could also highlight what Bloomberg has foisted on New York City.

In fact, I wouldn't link nanny-statism directly to the Democrats any more than I would link your statement about trading the WTC/9-11 for the Capitol to Islamic fundamentalist AQ sympathizers.

Another example of this expansion - and the mind-set that promotes it - is here in Northern California, where public school students in Rocklin, Elk Grove and several other districts are not allowed to bring their own purchased-by-parents supplies (e.g., binders, pencils, crayons, etc.) to school. If they do, they are taken from the student and put in the general supply, to be divided up and spread between all of the students. According to school administrators, this is to ensure that any little Johnny's or Jill's aren't made to feel bad, or inferior.

I suspect this type of behavior isn't limited to California, but haven't investigated.
 
Last edited:
Here's a clue...

I was playing chess with my friend and he said, “Let’s make this interesting.” So we stopped playing chess.
 
Back
Top