Comments by "Jack Haveman" (@JackHaveman52) on "Institute for Justice" channel.

You do realise that not everyone has that innate ability to get an education that the rest of us take for granted. They have perception difficulties that makes it almost impossible to learn to read and write. My brother in law is one of those people. Yet, he built his own roofing business. Then the government got involved. They kept setting up requirements that he was forced to take part in. He was fortunate. By the time, they started on him, he was getting older and he decided to retire early. There will be no more young people, with his learning afflictions, that will follow in his footsteps and still succeed, in spite of these problems....and it's people, like you, who are taking it away from them. They're shoeing horses. Let them feel the pride and earn their dignity without the government leaning over their shoulders, monitoring EVERY DAMN THING they do. Just a little common sense would be enough. I'm sure they'll all thank you, every month, when they get their welfare cheque.
8
Of course, you're being dismissive and missing the point. Did you not read the part where I mentioned my brother in law having his own roofing business even though he couldn't read? He only went to grade 8. It was LACK of government regulations that allowed to use his abilities to the max to succeed. There are all kinds of jobs like this, where people with learning disabilities or have found themselves in poor life situations that would still allow them to make a substantial contribution to our society....but.....no way. We must have the government interfere because they know stuff. Government will control and regulate us into poverty. California is a prime example of this. Over regulated and anyone that wants to accomplish anything ends up leaving. I'm astounded why anyone would want that much outside control over their lives.
6
You're still not addressing why the government should insist that a person should have high school to learn to shoe a horse or shingle a roof or any of these other blue collar type jobs. Babbling about "right wing tears" isn't an argument but more of an ad hominem attack. I'm not saying that ALL regulations are bad but when a government over regulates, you begin to stifle imagination, drive and vision by making it too costly to succeed. In the end, you don't have to give up. You just pick up and go where the government isn't as insistent of regulating everything that you do. That's exactly what that middle class is doing in the reference I gave....and I can give you a lot more.
6
Leonard Chornomaz What you're basically trying to say is that every bureaucrat, in existence, has a full and deep understanding of the law. That it is impossible for them to misinterpret the laws or use the laws to justify their position as a bureaucrat. Of course, he has to challenge what he's being charged with. Bureaucrats aren't lawyers. It's entirely possible that he's being charged by an individual that has no understanding of what the law says. It may well be that he has no idea on what he's doing. Incompetent bureaucrats do exist, you know. They exist in every walk of life. I'm astounded that you actually feel that there is no way a bureaucrat could be wrong in his understanding of the law. Just accept what he says and take your lumps. Especially after I showed you that the copyright laws do NOT require one to copyright what one publishes. I showed you the exact statement from those who uphold those laws....and STILL you insist that they MUST be correct.
5
Leonard Chornomaz The copyright already exists. They used to ask for a copy of the material being copyrighted when one was applying. You're under no obligation, under the law, to apply for a copyright for anything you publish. Also, if it is true, as he claims, that no other publisher has ever heard of this law, then it would seem that this guy is being targeted for some egregious reason that we're not privy to. He's claiming that this law hasn't been applied in years, decades. If you can show that this is a part of every day procedure in the publishing business, TODAY, then you'd have a case. If he is correct, then this is just the actions of an arbitrary and autocratic bureaucrat and really doesn't serve the interests of anyone but that specific bureaucrat.
4
Leonard Chornomaz It would appear that he is going to challenge it in court. Also, I've never heard of a law that required you to copyright written material. Is that REALLY a law. We must apply to copyright everything we print? According to this, it isn't mandatory. This is a summary but it does link to the copyright law at the US Copyright Office. If that's so, then this guy did nothing wrong. https://www.stopfakes.gov/article?id=Do-I-Have-to-Register-My-Copyright-Claim
4
30 thousand dollars at 500 bucks a day is 60 days or 8 weeks. Had the city sent a worker over to mow his lawn, they could have charged him the cost of the worker, I'd say around 100 bucks. That way the lawn would be up to standards and the man could have kept his house. That would be the neighbourly thing to do and what a good caring government bureau would do. Even better, they could have hired the work out to a small lawn care business who would do the work at a reasonable rate. However, that doesn't line their pockets.
4
@mariegarside8830 Is there something in the US Constitution that says that police can hold someone in jail even though a quick search could prove that this person is innocent of any crimes? I don't remember that part.
3
READ my posts, would you. I, specifically, said that regulations are necessary. Capitalism works when it operates within the law. However, when you OVER regulate, you add costs, stifle creative spirit and hand cuff the entrepreneurial spirit. When a regulation serves no purpose, why would one insist on having it? Why do you insist that it has to one of the other and only the most extreme examples? Either regulate EVERYTHING or NOTHING. Is there no room for common sense? Since the topic on who's paying hasn't been brought up, why would I comment on it? Also, what does it matter who pays? If a person can shoe a horse without a high school diploma, why insist on it? All it does is give a job(s) to another government employee(s) and inflate the tax bill for all.
3
Now you're just being intentionally obtuse. I've said, at least 2 times now, that regulations are important but you just ignore that and keep insisting that I don't want ANY regulations. You're discussing in bad faith and holding onto assumptions that you've made up because that's the only way to validate your position. You don't want to engage what I'm saying so you just make up your own narrative and argue against that. It's called "creating a strawman". It's a logical fallacy. I'm arguing against OVER regulation and making rules that have no purpose other than to have rules. Is TOTAL government control really that great? North Korea has embraced that way of life. Ultimate and total government control. I'm talking about a balance. Control when it makes sense but only when it makes sense. You've not brought up one good argument why a high school dropout can't learn to shoe horses or do any of those menial jobs that require some skill and training. You've not shown how it makes sense other than some convoluted allusion to how it makes sense for the government to control EVERYTHING. It's as if you think the government is infallible. How naive.
3
ONCE AGAIN...."REGULATIONS ARE NECESSARY" That is directly from my last comment. Who do you think regulates necessary regulations. THE GOVERNMENT. I NEVER said that governments aren't necessary. You're putting that in my mouth. I'm talking about un-necessary regulations, not un-necessary government. Are you really trying to say that EVERY regulation that a government makes is absolutely necessary? REALLY? Here's a good law. In New Jersey, it's illegal to wear a bullet proof vest while committing a crime. Another one. It's illegal to have a pet rat in Montana. Or this. It's illegal in Anchorage to bring your pet flamingo into a barber shop. Yup.....we're paying politician's to sit around and come up with these laws. However, you don't think we should ever question them because.....I'm not sure why. It looks like I'll have to say this one more time. REGULATIONS ARE NECESSARY. They're necessary when they make sense. It appears that you just don't want to see this statement for a reason that I can't comprehend. Governments pass good laws and stupid laws. They're made up of human beings and people do have that tendency to act foolish at times. Let's try to keep the stupid laws to a minimum. Unless you welcome stupid laws and you believe that the government in NEVER wrong. If that's the case, I don't know what to say other than that the next time you feel the urge to criticise Donald Trump, don't. He's the government and the government is infallible. If you don't like his regulations, move to Mexico.
3
So....now it's either ME or the government in charge. Back to going into the ridiculous of extremes to making your point.. You just can't admit that the government isn't ALWAYS in the right, can you? Answer this ONE question. Do you always accept everything, that everyone in the government says, as necessary and fact? It's a question that requires a yes/no answer. I'll bet you don't answer it.
3
Leonard Chornomaz "Obviously there is a law" This is from YOUR comment. I've posted a link to where you can actually read the law for yourself and it says that you are NOT required to apply for a copyright for material that you publish. THAT is the law. Yet, you still insist that the law does exist. What am I to assume? You have no proof other than this guy is being taken to court. That's not proof. I've given proof that compelled copyright applications do not exist. All you've said that it MUST exist because this bureaucrat is charging him. I have to assume that you think bureaucrats are never wrong. Of the two of us, I have the stronger argument. Then you add what his lawyer said and all you have is the fact that the guy is being charged. You don't know the person that's behind the charge or what he's basing it on or even whether the person has the competence to understand what the law says or means or whether it even exists.
3
bombchomsky She was charged with theft of the petition. It said so right in the video. It even shows the arrest papers and you can see, at the 4 minute and 17 second point of the video, where the word "theft" is clearly shown. Maybe you should have watched more than 3 minutes of the video. Also, before you accuse someone of anything, get the evidence to support your claim.
2
@stevepettersen3283 Why not arrest every Jennifer Heath in America? That way they're sure to get the right one, somewhere.
2
I didn't say that they WANTED to regulate you into poverty. I said that this would be the end, unintended result of overt regulation. California is a paradise for the super rich and large corporations but it's killing the middle class. Housing and strict, complicated housing regulations are the main reasons. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/12/growing-number-of-californians-considering-moving-from-state-survey.html
2
No.....you explain to me, why anyone should learn a trade, that has been in existence for 1000 years, why he, SUDDENLY, needs to have a high school diploma. It wasn't necessary 50 years ago, but now it is. THAT'S what he was talking about. You're taking away from the guy who wants to learn, because you don't like the guy who's teaching him because you think that he might be a crook. That's a wonderful way to judge a person. Guilty....until proven innocent. If he is a crook, investigate HIM. Don't penalise the guy who wants to learn. That's what this regulation is doing. You've taken away any chance that he might have to learn from a reputable teacher because the rules state that he's not capable of learning. He's not allowed to even try, because he doesn't fit the criteria that they've set, NOT because the teacher might be a crook. Thank you, STATE. I thought you were there to help the average citizen, not put up roadblocks.
2
As long as they comply with all food and safety requirements and pay the requisite local, state and federal taxes, leave them alone. It's just Chamber of Commerce business autocrats who don't want to see any competition. In reality, it's short sighted. The more a region attracts successful businesses the better business will be for the individual, unless that individual doesn't want to do the things to keep them competitive. Then banning them is their best option. It's backward think in business strategy.
2
@nodak81 Why should anyone be forced to get a driver's licence to work at some generic job? Some people can't drive and shouldn't. Others are afraid to get behind the wheel. Some have physical problems or might be under a suspension due to addictions. Why should they not be allowed to work because they can't drive? It's a stupid rule. I'm a bartender. I don't need to drive a car to serve my customers. What kind of arbitrary and autocratic rule would force me to get a driver's licence to do my job?
1
@blackcattours So....the guy that passes the test the very first time and has his licence thinks that's there's nothing wrong with the process. Oh..kay.
1
@Ace1000ks Yet, Clarence Thomas, wrote an opinion in 2017, strongly criticising this policy. It really doesn't matter who's responsible because every Democrat administration allowed it to happen. If you want this kind of injustice to end, talk to your local representatives, Democrat or Republican, and tell them that you'll vote for the candidate that wants to repeal this horrendous policy. If neither side satisfies you, primary them out of their position. If you try to solve it through party politics, you'll get just that. Party politics. Remember, it's the FBI that told Twitter to suppress the Biden laptop information. Anyone that thinks that only ONE side is corrupt is either brainwashed or wilfully ignorant.
1
@Ace1000ks Personally, I don't like Donald Trump but the one thing that he did was expose the "swamp" to use his own words, in Washington and in politics in general. A lot of us didn't realise how pervasive it was and it would never have been known without the powerful reach of the internet. That doesn't mean that Trump isn't corrupt but his presidency was all about how the swamp doesn't want ANYONE to rock the boat and Trump sure did that, like him or not. His presidency might be looked at, in the future, as a turning point for America. Whether that will be a good thing or not, in the long run, has yet to be fully realised.
1
@readhistory2023 That's why the warning to the Canadian truckers. The police will take it, whether you're doing something wrong or not. You can't assume guilt. That goes against everything the United States and the Constitution stands for. The money belongs to the trucker or the citizen and unless they can PROVE that this was ill gotten gain, they have NO right to it. A person can carry their money around any way they want. It's their right.
1
I realise that we're only getting one side of the story but I can't see how the town council and especially this councilman can justify their position. Going to jail for the crime of operating a business is beyond excessive. They even lied about how this couple was disposing their grease, proven by the inspector's 4 reports. No matter how I assess it, this is a misuse of power and I can't help but think that this had to do the council member's personal business interests. No outsiders allowed in their little club.
1
Another type of government regulation. It's not the same as shoeing horses but it's another example of government over reach. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr2oItXC1eM This is how much government REALLY cares about the individual.
1
You have no facts to prove why he's complaining. You're making it up because that's what you want to believe. You STILL haven't explained to me why a 1000 plus trade, suddenly needs a high school diploma to show competence. You keep dodging that. Now, I'm going to start with the personal attacks. You're still acting like a child. Instead of having mommy and daddy look after you, you want to replace them with the mommy and daddy state. Grow up. Stand up on your own 2 feet for a change, instead of having some authority figure telling you what to say, think or behave. Why any adult human being wants to have his every movement in life governed, is both astounding and baffling. Do you not have the maturity to stand up and declare yourself a sovereign human being? Never mind. Don't respond until the government tells you the correct answer.
1
@bobm9509 That is ironic. I wonder who's buying those slaves in Africa right now. They would't be Muslims.....would they? That might explain the crickets. Muslims are a protected group. That's important in these times of "your identity defines who you are". Can't have the oppressed be the oppressor, can we. Things are unacceptable until I do it. That's the mantra of the left..
1
I've owned a home renovation firm and I've managed a small business for a small company as well. I've had to deal with paperwork, and MORE paperwork, and MORE regulations, until there was so much regulation, that it would take a special consultant to untangle all the requirements. Apparently, "fuck off" is the official way of telling me that you refuse to answer ANY of my questions. Great stuff. Through are entire exchange, you've never, once, tried to have an adult conversation and not, once, have you even attempted to answer any of my questions. Then you finish in exactly the way that I expected. "Fuck off". You're quite the intellectual. SMH.
1
Check out the regulations in this small town. Of course, if you lived there, you'd pay all the fines that the city would levy on you because regulations are ALWAYS in your best interest. This city would just love to have a compliant citizen like you move in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8P-l8_dTsI
1
@greg_austin Don't be intentionally obtuse. "They" are the arresting officers of Jennifer Heath. "They" are NOT a "they" who are cops in Peoria. We are talking about a specific case. "They", police officers of Broward county, arrested the wrong woman, Jennifer Heath, who is TWICE the age of the Jennifer Heath that they wanted, was a different height and had a different eye colour. Then "they" held her for 3 days even though there was doubt about whether she was the right person wanted. Her drivers licence even showed that "they" had the wrong person. Worse, there was ANOTHER Jennifer Heath on that cruise, who was ALSO the wrong Jennifer Heath. These police officers of Broward County, the "they" that is being talked about, are at fault for arresting the wrong person, NOT for being at fault for everything. I'm astounded that this has to be explained to you. I doubt that you'd ask such a question if it was YOU that spent 3 days in jail for no fault. In case you're confused on who the "you" is that I'm talking about, I'm talking about "greg_austin".......you.
1
Imminent domain is necessary in the huge projects that give us our highways, railroads, airports and the like. Without it, we'd never be able to take on the big projects that sustain a viable economy. It's not a policy in place so a PRIVATE developer can take your property so he can make a fortune. Imminent domain should only be enacted in the most extreme of cases. This case here smells of cronyism.
1
@JR-zm2yu OMG. This started out as a video about a woman who seems to have been bullied, by a city mayor, and it's devolved into a discussion about Reptilian Overlords. Wow......just wow.
1