Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
I don't have to make it wrong, it's inherently wrong for the same reason the video is bull#^&#^&#^&#^&.
There has to be some regulation otherwise we'll see rampant corruption and environmental damage. This is proven by history and supported by a majority of the people.
The question is if the regulation is so burdensome that it slows the progress of the economy. The video doesn't prove that point at all, it simply throws out haunting circular arguments that are easily refuted.
-spence
|
I didn't say I want zero regulation.
What I'm saying is this...prooduction would be higher (at least in the future if not already) if McCain won in 2008, because he would not have rejected as many permits. And McCain didn't propose to eliminate regulation, he would just have less regulation than Obama. Same with Romney.
Spence, if you're claiming that oil production isn't lower under Obama than it will be if Romney wins, that's absurd. Is that what you're saying?
I'm not sure if the suppression is burdensome to the point that it's hurting the economy (although in my opinion, that's probably the case). But that's not what you said. You said that Obama is clearly not suppressing oil production. That's what you said, and it's false.