It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
...why not examine the regulations and remove/revise the ones that aren't accomplishing what they should be accomplishing?
originally posted by: EvillerBob
originally posted by: theantediluvian
...why not examine the regulations and remove/revise the ones that aren't accomplishing what they should be accomplishing?
Because he only gets 8 years. I'm guessing he wants to see some changes made before humanity starts colonizing Pluto (which by then will be the last uninhabited planet in the solar system).
originally posted by: theantediluvian
This really doesn't make any sense at all. Are all regulations equal in impact and purpose? Do all federal agencies have unnecessary, ineffective/counterproductive or overly burdensome regulations and in the same proportions?
Rather than this ham-fisted approach that sounds like a stupid fad diet (eat only orange foods bro! you'll lose weight!) why not examine the regulations and remove/revise the ones that aren't accomplishing what they should be accomplishing?
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: EvillerBob
originally posted by: theantediluvian
...why not examine the regulations and remove/revise the ones that aren't accomplishing what they should be accomplishing?
Because he only gets 8 years. I'm guessing he wants to see some changes made before humanity starts colonizing Pluto (which by then will be the last uninhabited planet in the solar system).
Four years. He gets four years. He needs to win another election to get that second four. Don't pretend like they are guaranteed. The Constitution disagrees with you.
PS: Pluto isn't a planet.
originally posted by: EvillerBob
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: EvillerBob
originally posted by: theantediluvian
...why not examine the regulations and remove/revise the ones that aren't accomplishing what they should be accomplishing?
Because he only gets 8 years. I'm guessing he wants to see some changes made before humanity starts colonizing Pluto (which by then will be the last uninhabited planet in the solar system).
Four years. He gets four years. He needs to win another election to get that second four. Don't pretend like they are guaranteed. The Constitution disagrees with you.
PS: Pluto isn't a planet.
8 years. It is his... destiny.
And Pluto isn't a planet now. By that time in the future, it will have been re-re-classified as a planet. Possibly there will be a "Make Pluto Planetary Again" Act of some kind.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: EvillerBob
8 years. It is his... destiny.
And Pluto isn't a planet now. By that time in the future, it will have been re-re-classified as a planet. Possibly there will be a "Make Pluto Planetary Again" Act of some kind.
Thanks for the alternative facts.
originally posted by: jimmyx
have any of you "geniuses" above even consider that there might be.....A REASON!!!!.....for those regulations?.....are any of you able to cite what regulation(s) he will get rid of?...or the details?.....and yet you say this is GREAT....the ignorance of this is stupifiying
originally posted by: theantediluvian
This really doesn't make any sense at all. Are all regulations equal in impact and purpose? Do all federal agencies have unnecessary, ineffective/counterproductive or overly burdensome regulations and in the same proportions?
Rather than this ham-fisted approach that sounds like a stupid fad diet (eat only orange foods bro! you'll lose weight!) why not examine the regulations and remove/revise the ones that aren't accomplishing what they should be accomplishing?