Why don’t you identify all these easily found regulations then?
There’s a whole YIMBY movement, for example, that has identified specific regulations that are no longer valid and have made tremendous strides in proving and changing these regulations for almost universally better outcomes.
So where are all these specific regulations that are so terrible and the evidence that they are indeed net negatives.
I absolutely believe such regulations exist. But that’s not what these people care about. They simply care about trashing the govt to make it easier to drown, otherwise they would actually act like the YIMBY movement and identify specific regulations and work on changing those.
> Why don’t you identify all these easily found regulations then?
That was rude, and didn't at all speak to OP's point. They indicated that not all regulations are equal. Some are important and put into place because people died without them. Others are put into place for less important reasons. And the fact that _some_ regulations were removed doesn't mean that "ones written in blood" necessarily were.
There are definitely regulations out there written by people that have no idea what they are talking about, and that are a net negative on the area(s) they impact. Does that mean we should remove Chesterton's Fence? No. But it does mean that, if you see someone removing a fence, you shouldn't immediately accuse them of causing harm.
It’s not rude. Making some inane point contrasting FAA regulations to HR rules is a stupid comparison feeding the nihilist attitude that everything is broken, except for what I think.
Air regulations are “written in blood”. Nobody claimed that OPM rules about HR were.
I took it more as a don't throw the baby out with the bath water type comment. Regulations _do_ need to be looked at and decided if they should be kept. Not every regulation was written in blood, and not every regulation is going to get people killed if we get rid of it. Some of them are critical, no doubt. But there's also a lot of them written by people that don't know what they're doing, but feel the need to justify their job.
Okay, what blood was the NOAA regulations concerning earth-observing satellites written in? The national security justification is quite flimsy when you remember that China, Russia, etc are not bound to those regulations, only satellites from the US.
There’s a whole YIMBY movement, for example, that has identified specific regulations that are no longer valid and have made tremendous strides in proving and changing these regulations for almost universally better outcomes.
So where are all these specific regulations that are so terrible and the evidence that they are indeed net negatives.
I absolutely believe such regulations exist. But that’s not what these people care about. They simply care about trashing the govt to make it easier to drown, otherwise they would actually act like the YIMBY movement and identify specific regulations and work on changing those.