Pogre Audioholic Slumlord Feb 17, 2021 #141 jbiz42 said: Well, what happens when a company refuses to pay the fine (say they have technical justification)? Click to expand... They get fined more until the govt freezes their bank accounts and takes their money whether they want to give it or not? Suspend whatever license they need to do business?
jbiz42 said: Well, what happens when a company refuses to pay the fine (say they have technical justification)? Click to expand... They get fined more until the govt freezes their bank accounts and takes their money whether they want to give it or not? Suspend whatever license they need to do business?
panteragstk Audioholic Warlord Feb 17, 2021 #142 Pogre said: If you're caught fudging specs they drag you out into the street and publicly beat you with a stick to send a message. Click to expand... Sounds like a fun job. Where do we sign up?
Pogre said: If you're caught fudging specs they drag you out into the street and publicly beat you with a stick to send a message. Click to expand... Sounds like a fun job. Where do we sign up?
jbiz42 Junior Audioholic Feb 17, 2021 #143 Pogre said: They get fined more until the govt freezes their bank accounts and takes their money whether they want to give it or not? Suspend whatever license they need to do business? Click to expand... So theft isn’t violence? And if they continue to do business without a license? Where does the constitution permit the federal government to do any of this?
Pogre said: They get fined more until the govt freezes their bank accounts and takes their money whether they want to give it or not? Suspend whatever license they need to do business? Click to expand... So theft isn’t violence? And if they continue to do business without a license? Where does the constitution permit the federal government to do any of this?
Pogre Audioholic Slumlord Feb 17, 2021 #144 jbiz42 said: So theft isn’t violence? And if they continue to do business without a license? Where does the constitution permit the federal government to do any of this? Click to expand... Wow. You're like dealing with an apologist. Just keep moving the goal posts. Yes if you continue breaking the law you will eventually end up in jail. That goes for anything anywhere. It can happen if you don't pay a speeding ticket too... Are you suggesting we shouldn't have any laws or standards? No, all theft is not violence. There is nothing physically involved with freezing a company's bank account. If you got hacked would you tell everyone you're the victim of a violent attack? Seek counseling? Claim PTSD? Lol
jbiz42 said: So theft isn’t violence? And if they continue to do business without a license? Where does the constitution permit the federal government to do any of this? Click to expand... Wow. You're like dealing with an apologist. Just keep moving the goal posts. Yes if you continue breaking the law you will eventually end up in jail. That goes for anything anywhere. It can happen if you don't pay a speeding ticket too... Are you suggesting we shouldn't have any laws or standards? No, all theft is not violence. There is nothing physically involved with freezing a company's bank account. If you got hacked would you tell everyone you're the victim of a violent attack? Seek counseling? Claim PTSD? Lol
RichB Audioholic Field Marshall Feb 17, 2021 #145 The value of the FTC for amplification specifications is the conditions for the test were standardized. Clearly amps do have to have FTC ratings to be sold, because many do not. - Rich
The value of the FTC for amplification specifications is the conditions for the test were standardized. Clearly amps do have to have FTC ratings to be sold, because many do not. - Rich
mtrycrafts Seriously, I have no life. Feb 17, 2021 #146 sterling shoote said: Less government regulation. Get your fat government ass out of amp marketing. There are plenty of private electronics standardization association entities which can guide and direct consumers. Click to expand... And, what enforcement powers do those private groups have? How effective are they? Whose interest are they serving? FTC is not in the marketing business, FYI but in enforcement of standards. Maybe FAA should be handed over to a private organization too?
sterling shoote said: Less government regulation. Get your fat government ass out of amp marketing. There are plenty of private electronics standardization association entities which can guide and direct consumers. Click to expand... And, what enforcement powers do those private groups have? How effective are they? Whose interest are they serving? FTC is not in the marketing business, FYI but in enforcement of standards. Maybe FAA should be handed over to a private organization too?
mtrycrafts Seriously, I have no life. Feb 17, 2021 #147 We should just stamp "buyer beware" on all products and services.
jbiz42 Junior Audioholic Feb 17, 2021 #148 mtrycrafts said: We should just stamp "buyer beware" on all products and services. Click to expand... Or you could move to a country with more government oversight. They tend to be much worse off, but hey, it would satisfy your fetish for authoritarianism.
mtrycrafts said: We should just stamp "buyer beware" on all products and services. Click to expand... Or you could move to a country with more government oversight. They tend to be much worse off, but hey, it would satisfy your fetish for authoritarianism.
jbiz42 Junior Audioholic Feb 17, 2021 #149 3db said: How is a company being fined for misleading advertisement violent? Based on your thinking, speed limits need to be withdrawn, drinking and driving should be encouraged and lets all buy more assault rifles because there must isnt enough of them in the hands of the citizens to take care of all the schools. Click to expand... You clearly haven't thought this through. More hyperbolic straw men; this was addressed earlier. Maybe read first.
3db said: How is a company being fined for misleading advertisement violent? Based on your thinking, speed limits need to be withdrawn, drinking and driving should be encouraged and lets all buy more assault rifles because there must isnt enough of them in the hands of the citizens to take care of all the schools. Click to expand... You clearly haven't thought this through. More hyperbolic straw men; this was addressed earlier. Maybe read first.
jbiz42 Junior Audioholic Feb 17, 2021 #150 Pogre said: Wow. You're like dealing with an apologist. Just keep moving the goal posts. Yes if you continue breaking the law you will eventually end up in jail. That goes for anything anywhere. It can happen if you don't pay a speeding ticket too... Are you suggesting we shouldn't have any laws or standards? No, all theft is not violence. There is nothing physically involved with freezing a company's bank account. If you got hacked would you tell everyone you're the victim of a violent attack? Seek counseling? Claim PTSD? Lol Click to expand... No, the goal post of violence was never moved. You just didn't think all the way through it. That's the problem with state intervention; people think it would be "nice" for the government to control all kinds of things, not considering (or observing) the consequences. This is why our prison population is larger than China's, with a large portion for victimless crimes. Not suggesting no laws, and I am a huge proponent of standards. I just think that as much as possible should be done privately. In this case, think of something like the Goodhousekeeping seal of approval. Why does the government have to be involved with audio specifications? It makes no sense.
Pogre said: Wow. You're like dealing with an apologist. Just keep moving the goal posts. Yes if you continue breaking the law you will eventually end up in jail. That goes for anything anywhere. It can happen if you don't pay a speeding ticket too... Are you suggesting we shouldn't have any laws or standards? No, all theft is not violence. There is nothing physically involved with freezing a company's bank account. If you got hacked would you tell everyone you're the victim of a violent attack? Seek counseling? Claim PTSD? Lol Click to expand... No, the goal post of violence was never moved. You just didn't think all the way through it. That's the problem with state intervention; people think it would be "nice" for the government to control all kinds of things, not considering (or observing) the consequences. This is why our prison population is larger than China's, with a large portion for victimless crimes. Not suggesting no laws, and I am a huge proponent of standards. I just think that as much as possible should be done privately. In this case, think of something like the Goodhousekeeping seal of approval. Why does the government have to be involved with audio specifications? It makes no sense.
panteragstk Audioholic Warlord Feb 17, 2021 #151 jbiz42 said: Or you could move to a country with more government oversight. They tend to be much worse off, but hey, it would satisfy your fetish for authoritarianism. Click to expand... Oversight isn't the issue there, it's who is doing it. Yes, our government is also a government, but the intent (or what should be the intent) of oversight is to protect the consumer. Just because antifreeze tastes sweet doesn't mean companies should be allowed to use it in candy. Oversight exists in an attempt to stop unethical business practices, at least in this context. Bring on the "that's where it starts" arguments...
jbiz42 said: Or you could move to a country with more government oversight. They tend to be much worse off, but hey, it would satisfy your fetish for authoritarianism. Click to expand... Oversight isn't the issue there, it's who is doing it. Yes, our government is also a government, but the intent (or what should be the intent) of oversight is to protect the consumer. Just because antifreeze tastes sweet doesn't mean companies should be allowed to use it in candy. Oversight exists in an attempt to stop unethical business practices, at least in this context. Bring on the "that's where it starts" arguments...
jbiz42 Junior Audioholic Feb 17, 2021 #152 panteragstk said: Oversight isn't the issue there, it's who is doing it. Yes, our government is also a government, but the intent (or what should be the intent) of oversight is to protect the consumer. Just because antifreeze tastes sweet doesn't mean companies should be allowed to use it in candy. Oversight exists in an attempt to stop unethical business practices, at least in this context. Bring on the "that's where it starts" arguments... Click to expand... Why do you assert this is the role of government? Why do you assume that government action actually stops unethical business practices?
panteragstk said: Oversight isn't the issue there, it's who is doing it. Yes, our government is also a government, but the intent (or what should be the intent) of oversight is to protect the consumer. Just because antifreeze tastes sweet doesn't mean companies should be allowed to use it in candy. Oversight exists in an attempt to stop unethical business practices, at least in this context. Bring on the "that's where it starts" arguments... Click to expand... Why do you assert this is the role of government? Why do you assume that government action actually stops unethical business practices?
3db Audioholic Slumlord Feb 17, 2021 #153 jbiz42 said: You clearly haven't thought this through. More hyperbolic straw men; this was addressed earlier. Maybe read first. Click to expand... You clearly live with a huge chip on your shoulder when it comes to government involvement. Out of all the "chaff" you been spouting, the single grain of truth you posted is that the rules need to be updated to keep up with technology. The rest however is paranoid thinking on your part.
jbiz42 said: You clearly haven't thought this through. More hyperbolic straw men; this was addressed earlier. Maybe read first. Click to expand... You clearly live with a huge chip on your shoulder when it comes to government involvement. Out of all the "chaff" you been spouting, the single grain of truth you posted is that the rules need to be updated to keep up with technology. The rest however is paranoid thinking on your part.
3db Audioholic Slumlord Feb 17, 2021 #154 jbiz42 said: Why do you assert this is the role of government? Why do you assume that government action actually stops unethical business practices? Click to expand... Why do you think it doesn't?
jbiz42 said: Why do you assert this is the role of government? Why do you assume that government action actually stops unethical business practices? Click to expand... Why do you think it doesn't?
H highfigh Seriously, I have no life. Feb 18, 2021 #155 jbiz42 said: The enforcement is where violence comes in. But there are so many holes in the rules that it doesn't force consistency. If a company rightfully disagrees with the obsolete or misguided rules and wishes to specify/rate in a better way, it will be stopped (by force if necessary). So it reduces improvements and innovation with regard to specifications, and thus inherently affects transactions done on that basis. Click to expand... You need to read the definition of 'violence'.
jbiz42 said: The enforcement is where violence comes in. But there are so many holes in the rules that it doesn't force consistency. If a company rightfully disagrees with the obsolete or misguided rules and wishes to specify/rate in a better way, it will be stopped (by force if necessary). So it reduces improvements and innovation with regard to specifications, and thus inherently affects transactions done on that basis. Click to expand... You need to read the definition of 'violence'.
H highfigh Seriously, I have no life. Feb 18, 2021 #156 mtrycrafts said: We should just stamp "buyer beware" on all products and services. Click to expand... Because stamping 'Caveat emptor' would result in people seeing it and asking "What does that mean?", someone else saying "I don't know" and the first one asking "Do you take plastic?" after deciding that it isn't important.
mtrycrafts said: We should just stamp "buyer beware" on all products and services. Click to expand... Because stamping 'Caveat emptor' would result in people seeing it and asking "What does that mean?", someone else saying "I don't know" and the first one asking "Do you take plastic?" after deciding that it isn't important.
H highfigh Seriously, I have no life. Feb 18, 2021 #157 jbiz42 said: I haven't heard of anything having to do with their enforcement. But how do you think enforcement is accomplished (whether through another federal organization or not)? A strongly-worded rebuke? Just because people are afraid to stand up to their obsolete and ineffective regulations doesn't mean there is no violence; coercion and threat of violence are still violence. Click to expand... So, you haven't heard of anything to do with the FTC's enforcement, but you leap to thinking it would be violent? Don't be a victim. Words aren't violence, except in the minds of those who are so weak that it amounts to emotional collapse. A threat isn't violence, either. Using some obscure word association to meet your needs in this thread doesn't make a rule or actions that result from violating rules meet the definition of the word- Definition of VIOLENCE the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy; an instance of violent treatment or procedure; injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage… See the full definition www.merriam-webster.com
jbiz42 said: I haven't heard of anything having to do with their enforcement. But how do you think enforcement is accomplished (whether through another federal organization or not)? A strongly-worded rebuke? Just because people are afraid to stand up to their obsolete and ineffective regulations doesn't mean there is no violence; coercion and threat of violence are still violence. Click to expand... So, you haven't heard of anything to do with the FTC's enforcement, but you leap to thinking it would be violent? Don't be a victim. Words aren't violence, except in the minds of those who are so weak that it amounts to emotional collapse. A threat isn't violence, either. Using some obscure word association to meet your needs in this thread doesn't make a rule or actions that result from violating rules meet the definition of the word- Definition of VIOLENCE the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy; an instance of violent treatment or procedure; injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage… See the full definition www.merriam-webster.com
H highfigh Seriously, I have no life. Feb 18, 2021 #158 jbiz42 said: No, the goal post of violence was never moved. You just didn't think all the way through it. That's the problem with state intervention; people think it would be "nice" for the government to control all kinds of things, not considering (or observing) the consequences. This is why our prison population is larger than China's, with a large portion for victimless crimes. Not suggesting no laws, and I am a huge proponent of standards. I just think that as much as possible should be done privately. In this case, think of something like the Goodhousekeeping seal of approval. Why does the government have to be involved with audio specifications? It makes no sense. Click to expand... The violence that comes with those 'victimless crimes', assuming you mean the illegal drug trade, doesn't make it 'victimless'. How many people need to die in drive-by shootings that come with shytty aim, crossfire, firing into the wrong house or car, etc for you to see that it's far from victimless? What about the ones who die because someone sold drugs laced with something like Fentanyl, without telling anyone or the Heroin was stronger than expected? Try selling that crap to the families of people who OD'd. Should we let those convicted of fraud roam free, possibly screwing people by selling things that aren't as described? Could be any product or service, but let's use 'fraud' as it applies to this thread. or does their crime not fit your definition of 'violence'? The government isn't involved with audio specs, per se, as its main focus for the FTC, audio specs just happen to enter the discussion because, in defining trade practices, the information used by people to make a buying decision for audio equipment needs to be accurate and when a manufacturer or seller goes off the rails and makes it up as they go along, people don't get what they wanted. I get the impression that if you received a list of requirements that came from engineers, you would question their validity.
jbiz42 said: No, the goal post of violence was never moved. You just didn't think all the way through it. That's the problem with state intervention; people think it would be "nice" for the government to control all kinds of things, not considering (or observing) the consequences. This is why our prison population is larger than China's, with a large portion for victimless crimes. Not suggesting no laws, and I am a huge proponent of standards. I just think that as much as possible should be done privately. In this case, think of something like the Goodhousekeeping seal of approval. Why does the government have to be involved with audio specifications? It makes no sense. Click to expand... The violence that comes with those 'victimless crimes', assuming you mean the illegal drug trade, doesn't make it 'victimless'. How many people need to die in drive-by shootings that come with shytty aim, crossfire, firing into the wrong house or car, etc for you to see that it's far from victimless? What about the ones who die because someone sold drugs laced with something like Fentanyl, without telling anyone or the Heroin was stronger than expected? Try selling that crap to the families of people who OD'd. Should we let those convicted of fraud roam free, possibly screwing people by selling things that aren't as described? Could be any product or service, but let's use 'fraud' as it applies to this thread. or does their crime not fit your definition of 'violence'? The government isn't involved with audio specs, per se, as its main focus for the FTC, audio specs just happen to enter the discussion because, in defining trade practices, the information used by people to make a buying decision for audio equipment needs to be accurate and when a manufacturer or seller goes off the rails and makes it up as they go along, people don't get what they wanted. I get the impression that if you received a list of requirements that came from engineers, you would question their validity.
T trochetier Full Audioholic Feb 18, 2021 #159 How the hell did we get from a straight forward thread on amplifier spec regulation review into this weird anti-govt debate? Govt. has a role to play in ensuring certain standards are maintained otherwise we have chaos and worse. I think laws and regulations should be up for review, update or sunset every X many years. The review should be written into each law and regulation. Technology change, society change, value systems change, the laws and regulations should also keep up with the changes. Otherwise we end up with outdated and often contradictory layers that become difficult to interpret and comply and also muddled due to differing contradictory opinions by various courts creating even more confusion.
How the hell did we get from a straight forward thread on amplifier spec regulation review into this weird anti-govt debate? Govt. has a role to play in ensuring certain standards are maintained otherwise we have chaos and worse. I think laws and regulations should be up for review, update or sunset every X many years. The review should be written into each law and regulation. Technology change, society change, value systems change, the laws and regulations should also keep up with the changes. Otherwise we end up with outdated and often contradictory layers that become difficult to interpret and comply and also muddled due to differing contradictory opinions by various courts creating even more confusion.
Trell Audioholic Spartan Feb 18, 2021 #160 trochetier said: How the hell did we get from a straight forward thread on amplifier spec regulation review into this weird anti-govt debate? ... Click to expand... And this thread is not even in the SteamVent forum
trochetier said: How the hell did we get from a straight forward thread on amplifier spec regulation review into this weird anti-govt debate? ... Click to expand... And this thread is not even in the SteamVent forum
