Text 12623, 83 rader
Skriven 2010-04-10 06:45:00 av DAVE DRUM (1:261/1381)
     Kommentar till en text av RICHARD WEBB
Ärende: Re: ABATE
=================
-=> Richard Webb wrote to DAVE DRUM <=-

 RW> HI Dave,

 DD> I was a registered lobbyist in Illinois, working to repeal Illinois'
 DD> helmet law back in the 1960s. On the day the legislature was
 DD> scheduled to vote to repeal (we had the votes lined up) the Illinois
 DD> Supreme Court struck down the legislation ... rendering our efforts
 DD> moot. Ever want to cheer and cuss at the same time???

 RW> Yep, seen that one <g>.  What part of ILlinois you from
 RW> DAve?

Springfield, the state capitol. Right in the shadow of the steal mill.
 
SNIPPETY ----------

 RW> <snip again>

 RW> Indeed, the way I"ve always thought of it, but my dad was
 RW> far from a libertarian.  Dad is of the belief that sometimes you have
 RW> to protect man from himself, by legislation if
 RW> that's the only way.  I figure that if a man needs regs and
 RW> legislation to protect him from himself, then, maybe he
 RW> needs to be left free running, HE'l take care of the
 RW> problem, hopefully before he contributes to the gene pool.

Darwin was right, you know? If left to itself stupidity is a self correcting
problem. 
 Bv)= 
 
 DD> Ah, but here's the deal. You're a realist. And the legislators
 DD> listen to the weeping "save us from ourselves" twats who promote
 DD> such. And to the loverly $$$ spread around by insurance companies to
 DD> promote MANDATORY safety regulations in individual matters of choice
 DD> - in order to increase their bottom line (already obscene) profits.
 DD> So, we're going to get mandated safety laws aimed at the individual.

 RW> Agreed, and the way it always is.  Dad and I have some of
 RW> our most vocal disagreements on this point.  Dad's argument
 RW> is that you can't expect everyone to be smart enough to know how/when
 RW> to protect himself, so at times you've just got to
 RW> tell him.  THe other day we were talking about the work
 RW> rules my lady and I have promulgated for our business, and
 RW> many which have to do with job site safety, i.e. wear the
 RW> hard hat when people are working overhead, etc.  HE did the
 RW> "see, I told ya" bit.  But, the employee has an option, use
 RW> the safety equipment, or look elsewhere for employment.

Eggs Ackley! I have a sunset gig driving a delivery van for Auto Zone (to eke
out me pittance from Social Security) which is really a gravy job. Lots of
windshield time, listen to my favourite music on the radio and no one in my
face unless I choose to let them be. I follow their rules ... well, except
going through drive-throughs for a soft drink or snack. But, I wear my seat
belt religiously and never, ever speed (I'm paid hourly). That isn't always the
way I work it in my own car.   Bv)= 
 
 RW> wHen we managed apartment compelxes for the better part of
 RW> five years we were totally injury free, as in nothing that
 RW> required more than maybe a band aid from the first aid kit.
 RW> wHen I managed commercial kitchen and restaurant facilities
 RW> I was proud of an injury free workplace record, and intended to keep
 RW> that string unbroken.  THe first lecture a new hire
 RW> got from me was on workplace safety.

It's a matter of business viability. If you have a good safety record as an
employer your liability and worker's comp rates should reflect that. Auto Zone
is so big as to be self-insured. And they certainly don't want to be paying out
big and avoidable worker's comp claims.

But, in the end it comes down to the gummint not having a proper place in
protecting supposedly responsible adults from their own stupidity.

ENJOY!!!

From Uncle Dirty Dave's Kitchen
Home of YAHOOOOAHHHH Hot Sauce & Hardin Cider 

 

... People will buy anything that is one to a customer. - Sinclair Lewis
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
 * Origin: ::The Holodeck BBS:: telnet//:holodeckbbs.homeip.net (1:261/1381)