DYE out of business?

[going_home]

Anyone else notice even after all these elegant dissertations the OP still has only 1 post ?



















I forgot to say one thing in my previous post.......



















In before the lock !

[dahoeb]

Anyone else notice even after all these elegant dissertations the OP still has only 1 post ?

wow...hmmm....

[Frizzle Fry]

since 1/2 the country does not pay into the system.

Just the ones who use the system least. Any the ones who pay the most (by % and quantity) almost not at all.

[CatoRockwell]

Yes, child labor, etc., slavery is bad. . I'm still waiting to see the people that advocate it's return. All anyone wants is a free market that can expand and thrive within just laws. Some regulation is good. But many regulations today are used more to push a political agenda or to justify an obsolete department's (the FCC for one) existence, rather than to correct a real and serious problem.

I advocate it's return

Slavery is against a free market system, indentured servitude, however, isn't and I'm in favor of it. If someone wants to sell themselves into slavery then who am I to stand in their way?

The problem with people who say "there's nothing wrong with regulation, it's just being done wrong" is that every single person has a different idea of what "good regulation" is. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on it, what they are not entitled to is to force that opinion down my throat when it's my business. The true uninhibited free market is the best form of regulation. You provide a crappy product, people stop buying it, you go out of business. You don't take care of your employees and a competitor does, you will quickly find your most skilled people leaving to greener pastures or unionizing. There is a natural consequence to every business decision, we don't need the government jumping in and making a ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL regulation. The moment we start down that slippery slope we get what we have today: A bunch of uneducated bureaucrats & puppet politicians who now make rules that benefit some and punish others.

I'll take my chances with the free market thank you.

[murdercrow]

This is a very interesting discussion. No really.
But is that Kristin Kreutz?!

I had a very important question...

[dahoeb]

I advocate it's return

Slavery is against a free market system, indentured servitude, however, isn't and I'm in favor of it. If someone wants to sell themselves into slavery then who am I to stand in their way?

The problem with people who say "there's nothing wrong with regulation, it's just being done wrong" is that every single person has a different idea of what "good regulation" is. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on it, what they are not entitled to is to force that opinion down my throat when it's my business. The true uninhibited free market is the best form of regulation. You provide a crappy product, people stop buying it, you go out of business. You don't take care of your employees and a competitor does, you will quickly find your most skilled people leaving to greener pastures or unionizing. There is a natural consequence to every business decision, we don't need the government jumping in and making a ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL regulation. The moment we start down that slippery slope we get what we have today: A bunch of uneducated bureaucrats & puppet politicians who now make rules that benefit some and punish others.

I'll take my chances with the free market thank you.

In principle I agree with you 100%; the whole "regs and govt is good, it's just being done wrong" argument is the same thing people use to say in favor of any tyrannical, centrally planned govt. "You just need an enlightened King/Czar/Govt Panel to run things".

I wouldn't trust these filthy politicians to babysit my house for a weekend let alone run an entire country. As far as I'm concerned, the only purpose of the federal government is to protect the borders, US assets abroad (US shipping lanes/merchant ships, US embassies/consulates, stuff like that). For everything else, I'd let the local governments handle it, thats why they're in place.

However, so much of the population is so dependent on the wonderful welfare state thats been created (and god knows civilization won't exist without the trusty hand of govt guiding us) I believe that the US is too far gone to roll back all the "progress" over the past 120 years. So I gotta aim for the next best thing and hope to just to have the current regulations stripped down to the very basics necessary to provide basic employee/customer safety. I do recognize though, that this would eventually lead to wonderful organizations like OSHA, the EPA, FDA, and most of the other alphabet agencies eventually.


As far as market manipulation, bailing out select businesses, forcing people to purchase a product (healthcare), regulating the internet, affirmative action, the welfare state in general, I'm hugely opposed to it. The war on hunger, the war on drugs, the war on poverty; not a single one is even remotely successful and has only served to expand government. I long to see the day in which somebody comes crawling to the Feds asking for a subsidy or any other type of handout only to have the POTUS tell them, "Sorry, that's not my job."

I actually remember reading an article about some obscure president from the late 1800's (Cleveland I think)...but a farmer from Oklahoma mailed him, asking for Fed assistance and a subsidy after his large farm had been devastated by drought and dust storms. The POTUS mailed back an absolutely scorn filled letter, shaming the farmer for having to gull to ask the Feds to get involved in something that was not their responsibility and for basically compromising the dignity of resourceful, full grown men everywhere who pick themselves up. You would NEVER have a response like this nowadays. It's truly hard to believe that the govt was EVER ran like this.

Not to get off on too much of a tangent though: but a part of me believes that a population gets the govt that they deserve. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, the Kennedy's, Barnie Frank....they don't vote themselves in office, their constituents do (you can probably lay some of the blame on crooked district structuring though....). Congressman like them represent the ideals of millions, otherwise they wouldn't be elected decade after decade. Unfortunately theres a lot of Americans that love sucking from the Govt teet and are scared to death of actually having to be adults. This is the culture we live in. Just look at Wisconsin.....

[CatoRockwell]

If you believe the system is too far gone to fix, then the only solution is to do as the founding father's did and secede.

I'm not opposed to this idea.

You are right, too many people want the system we have, but thats not the question. The question is: Do they have the right to force that tyranny on you or me? If not, then we must either fix or disentangle ourselves from this system.

[cockerpunk]

The moment we start down that slippery slope we get what we have today: A bunch of uneducated bureaucrats & puppet politicians who now make rules that benefit some and punish others.

i'd raise you with we have a public which niether cares, nor even knows teh first thing about governement regulations and there effect on your daily life. the EPA is a perfect example. they get crap all the time from all sides, and yet the EPA and the regulations it enforces are some of the best written, and most wildy sucessful regulations out there. anyone educated in complaince with the EPA knows that thos regulations effect EVERYONEs daily lives, and health. like fishing? like hunting? you better like the EPA, they are the ones that make that possible. without them the fish you catch would either not exist or be toxic and filled with heavy metals. like smog free cities? better like the EPA. they make sure NOx and SOx and mercury don't fill your lungs with every breath. like not havign acid rain? same thing .... it could even get to the point like china, a perfect example of a free market industrial society without environemntal regulation, and there children die every day from just playing outside. why? heavy metal posioning. the health effects of environmental protection are estimated to cost china more money in healthcare then it would cost to enforce good envornmental policy. this is a key reason why china is stiffening its eviornemental policys, it costs to much to not have them.

it all goes back to public understanding and education. step 1: we all need to agree that there needs to be SOME kind of regulation. in an industrial society where a single chemical accident can cause decades of health problems (death, cancer ...), this should be obivous. step 2: we need to deal with the experts and there data and not politicans or political dogma to make SMART regulations. there are plenty of smart regulations, and there are plenty of dumb ones.

[BigEvil]

like fishing? like hunting? you better like the EPA, they are the ones that make that possible.

Hmmm... I seem to recall hunting and fishing being around A LOT longer than the EPA.

[cockerpunk]

Hmmm... I seem to recall hunting and fishing being around A LOT longer than the EPA.

yeah, before industrialization. now we use so many toxic chemicals to sustain our daily lives, that they would easily destory what is left of our waterways if left unregulated.

the EPA regulates mercury. coal and pretty much everything we burn for power has mercury in it. this goes into the air, and eventually coems down in the rain, and pools in lakes and rivers. this is probably the number one contamination of waterways in rural areas, and it has gotten so bad in some places fishing is banned in many lakes in norther minnesota becuase of it. this is a key reason why mercury regulations have gotten tighter, becuase it gets everywhere when you burn coal. EVERYWHERE. its also nearly impossible clean up.

its not even worth starting on heavy metal and SOx and NOx polution controls in light of that obvious example.

now, in an age before industrialization, there is almost no need at all for environemtnal potection. but in the days where even common household products are produced with dangerious chemicals (which they are), that makes any production facility capable of cuasing massive fallouts, health problems, and even death.

heres a great example - chrome plating. pretty commonplace thing right? ends up on all sorts of stuff. chrome plating includes at least 6 chemicals which will kill you. do you want these poeple just dumping them? burning them? even if that is ok with you, can you see the problems that will happen if that leaches into the aquafers? or pools in lakes?

we have these regulations becuase the cost of what will happen if left unreglated is far higher then the PITA cuased by regulating it.

[BigEvil]

IIRC, the EPA was created in the early 70's buy the Nixon administraion. The country survied the industrial revolution, the total-war mobilizations of WWI & WWII, the post WWII boom, the 50's, the 60's, including the Hippy-stink of the late 60s - all without an EPA.

[cockerpunk]

IIRC, the EPA was created in the early 70's buy the Nixon administraion. The country survied the industrial revolution, the total-war mobilizations of WWI & WWII, the post WWII boom, the 50's, the 60's, including the Hippy-stink of the late 60s - all without an EPA.

ever herd of how technology advances? you know how much our lifestyles have changed since the post war era? all that technology is both complex to manufacture and costly to run.

this is also before widespread electronics manufacturing, widespread optical manufaturing, advanced polymers, composits .... you know, all that high tech stuff they don't do overseas ... also by far the most dangerious stuff.

also, the country has been averaging an increase in electrical useage incraese by about 10% per year, which means we have more then quadrupled the amount of electrical usage since the post war era.

our lifestyles have changed, technology changes, and higher tech stuff becomes mainstream, these problems are only going to get worse.



but hey, if you want to get rid of the EPA, just go check out china. plenty of non-regulation there, and look how sucessful that has been

[BigEvil]

ever herd of how technology advances? you know how much our lifestyles have changed since the post war era? all that technology is both complex to manufacture and costly to run.

:

Actually it funny you mention this point. As the technology to manufacture advances, so does the technology to do so both more efficiently and cleanly.

BTW, im sure you 'herd', but there already is a perfectly clean, minimally polluting source of energy already available that the tree huggers have made it almost impossible to implement.

[breg]

Well, avoiding all the political dissertations, and getting back to the DYE going out of business:
I seriously doubt that DYE will ever completely disappear. They have too tight a strangle-hold on the market for soft goods, and even though I am not a fan of their guns, they are pretty popular.
But, if you want proof there is this to consider: show me ONE DYE gun that retains its value the way AGD guns do.

The DM series just seem too top heavy to me. I have just never been a fan, and the NT series just does not do a lot for me. I mean yeah the tool-less sticky grips are nice, but the thing that sends me for a loop is that the image that it puts in my mind is that you must need to get into the grip frame a lot if the designers added that design feature. (Just kidding)

But, in the end, I am not gonna knock someone for picking DYE over another gun. It is a personal choice. I just think that there are so many other better choices for the money out there; both quality and performance wise. I mean look at the G6R: 3/4 the price, better efficiency, and easier to maintain.

Or another example: The GEO2. The gun is simpler, comes stock with a screen as opposed to blinking lights, and has a tool-less field strip. Yes, it does have a lower efficiency than the DMs or the NTs, but it is in my opinion a better firing gun.

And, finally, my favorite example: The Ripper Victory. $1500 will get you a better preforming gun: faster, better efficiency, definitely more limited (1 of 500), will hold its value far better, and has better support for the gun.

[cockerpunk]

Actually it funny you mention this point. As the technology to manufacture advances, so does the technology to do so both more efficiently and cleanly.

BTW, im sure you 'herd', but there already is a perfectly clean, minimally polluting source of energy already available that the tree huggers have made it almost impossible to implement.

of course the technology to make it clean must advance.

why?

becuase of enforcement of the laws.

do you seriously think that companies would invest billions in something that doesn't make them a single penny? do they do this out the goodness of there hearts? lets look at the rest of the world and see if companies do this in non-regulated nations. china? nope. Thailand? nope. India? gonna go with a f*ck no on that one ....

sorry man, without enforcement of sound regulations, corporations have not, and will not police themselves. the free market cares about one thing - profit. it doesn't care about anything else.




as far as power, yes of course. nuclear has always been the solution. i have written a 20+ paper on nuclear power and just how advanced it is today (thanks to france ... lol!). im no tree hugger, im an engineer. i dont think its the tree huggers per se, there is more then widespread opposition to nuclear ever since 3 mile island. as always, the public needs education on just how safe the gen5 plants are, and the gen6 plants are gonna be brilliant.