I've been keeping up with the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) but never blogged about it, mainly because I figured that any law with this many obvious and documented negative consequences could never really be allowed to go into effect. Once again, any sign of faith on my part in governement is rewarded with the rusty hooks of reality.
The CPSIA is a law which came about in the same way many laws with the word "safety" in them do: as a hysterical response to an overblown crisis. Remember all those Chinese products that contained lead? The ones that were going to kill little Johnny when he chewed the kung-fu grip off his G.I. Joe? Say hello to the aftermath!
Like most laws intended to keep everyone, everywhere safe through massive amounts of regulation, it has a raft of unintended consequences. One of the biggest is that anyone selling potentially toxic items must meet stringent testing guidelines for those items. Notice I didn't say "manufacturers of items...". That becomes important when you realize that items get sold and resold everywhere. eBay. Etsy. Craigslist. Pawn shops. Second-hand stores. Getting the picture?
What about items that are older? Antiques? Old books? Not exempt, apparently. These need to be tested as well. This is causing sellers, on advice of the Consumer Product & Safety Commission, to throw out books printed before 1985, as the ink may contain harmful levels of lead. You might be asking, how many cases of death-by-eating-a-book-made-before-1985 are on record. No, I know you're not really asking that. If you were, you'd work for the CPSC!
What can be done about this? Not much, until (and unless) cooler and smarter heads prevail. In the meantime read up on this subject, if for no other reason than to learn an abject lesson in the law of unintended consequences.
Other information:
Government page on the CPSIA
CPSC Guide to Sellers (.pdf)
Roundup of CPSIA related topics
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Again With The Soccer
Macy battles for the ball in indoor soccer.Macy's team is 3-0 after a 4-2 victory. Again, Macy played a lot of goalie, only giving up a single goal in the last two minutes. For more pictures, see my online album.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
A Letter to Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan (Updated)
The following is a letter I wrote to Senators Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan, my senators from North Dakota:
I urge you, Senator, to vote against the stimulus package now being considered in the Senate. If approved this money will add to our already huge debt, a debt that will linger long past our lifetimes. This means future generations will bear the burden of our collective decision. This stimulus package is laden with "pork" which will do little or nothing to provide lasting stimulus to the economy.
More troubling is the lack of accountability in how the money is spent, both to Congress and to the American people as a whole. It has been widely reported that the banks which benefited from the earlier stimulus package have refused to account for how the money was spent. It is also widely reported that little of it has been used to increase lending, the purported purpose of the stimulus.
As a citizen, I could not go to a bank and get a car loan then use that money for whatever purpose I desire. Furthermore, I couldn't refuse to disclose where the money had gone. But this seems to be common practice when handing out federal taxpayer money to private entities. It must not be allowed to continue.
I realize that you pride yourself in "bringing home the bacon" in regard to federal money to the state of North Dakota. But in this case, I believe it is not worth the price we will ultimately pay. Please vote to put an end to wasteful spending.
Thank you,
Jay Winkis
Fargo, ND
If you want your senators to hear you, it's not too late to register your opinion. The senate is expected to start debating the stimulus package this week.
Update: I got a response from Byron Dorgan's office. While I have no doubt it was written by one of his staff, it is an actual response and not a form letter, which is more than I expected. Below are snapshots of the letter. (Click on the image to enlarge.)
I urge you, Senator, to vote against the stimulus package now being considered in the Senate. If approved this money will add to our already huge debt, a debt that will linger long past our lifetimes. This means future generations will bear the burden of our collective decision. This stimulus package is laden with "pork" which will do little or nothing to provide lasting stimulus to the economy.
More troubling is the lack of accountability in how the money is spent, both to Congress and to the American people as a whole. It has been widely reported that the banks which benefited from the earlier stimulus package have refused to account for how the money was spent. It is also widely reported that little of it has been used to increase lending, the purported purpose of the stimulus.
As a citizen, I could not go to a bank and get a car loan then use that money for whatever purpose I desire. Furthermore, I couldn't refuse to disclose where the money had gone. But this seems to be common practice when handing out federal taxpayer money to private entities. It must not be allowed to continue.
I realize that you pride yourself in "bringing home the bacon" in regard to federal money to the state of North Dakota. But in this case, I believe it is not worth the price we will ultimately pay. Please vote to put an end to wasteful spending.
Thank you,
Jay Winkis
Fargo, ND
If you want your senators to hear you, it's not too late to register your opinion. The senate is expected to start debating the stimulus package this week.
Update: I got a response from Byron Dorgan's office. While I have no doubt it was written by one of his staff, it is an actual response and not a form letter, which is more than I expected. Below are snapshots of the letter. (Click on the image to enlarge.)
I appreciate getting a response from Senator Dorgan's office.
(originally posted on 2/2/09 at 8:01 am)
Tattoo You
I have a tattoo on my left bicep. It is my daughter's name woven into a design. It took me a long time to decide I really wanted to get a tattoo. It took me a long while after that to decide exactly what to get. We're talking a few years from the time the idea to get inked first entered my head to the actual sitting-in-the-chair part.
Tattoos are forever, and (in my opinion) mean something special. A life-changing event. Remembering a loved one who has passed on. Winning the Nobel Prize for chemistry. The reason for getting tattoos for truly important reasons and then waiting an appropriate time to confirm the decision is chronicled here.
(Warning: these images may be disturbing to people easily nauseated by bad decisions. Also, coarse language in the descriptions and comments.)
Tattoos are forever, and (in my opinion) mean something special. A life-changing event. Remembering a loved one who has passed on. Winning the Nobel Prize for chemistry. The reason for getting tattoos for truly important reasons and then waiting an appropriate time to confirm the decision is chronicled here.
(Warning: these images may be disturbing to people easily nauseated by bad decisions. Also, coarse language in the descriptions and comments.)
Makin' Bread
Macy mixing ingredients for Amish bread. Apparently, when they aren't making wood cabinets for space heaters this is what they eat.
Bread tastes better when the baker is happy.
Macy and Ruby wrestle to see who gets to lick the bowl.Monday, February 9, 2009
Capitalism School
Milton Friedman takes Phil Donahue to school on free market economics. The video might be old, but the message is timeless.
Internet Debate 101: Straw Men / Ad Hominem Combo Move
This is the first in what will be a totally random feature on how to win at that most noble sport of kings, internet arguing.
Today's lesson involves creating a strawman argument. This is the practice of attributing a statement or argument to an opponent that they didn't actually make, then attacking it. This is more effective when the "opponent" is either not around to defend himself or is a collection of people rather than an individual. When called on this chicanery, simply aver that the caller simply doesn't get it, preferably while disparaging his intelligence.
Example(*):
Commenter #1: Capitalists have been claiming for years that getting rid of all regulation over private industry would ensure economic growth. Clearly this has not happened, and they look like fools for ever having said it.
Commenter #2: When has anyone anywhere ever claimed that? And you do realize that Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae were some of the most heavily regulated entities in history. And that they were overseen directly by Congress. And that they still failed?
Commenter #1: If you're too stupid to do your own research don't expect me to do it for you. The evidence is everywhere and anyone with half a brain knows it.
Congratulations Commenter #1! You have mastered the art of the Strawman/Ad Hominem attack combo move! You are a winner!
(*) The conversation that follows was definitely not inspired by an actual exchange I once had. Nope, not at all.
Today's lesson involves creating a strawman argument. This is the practice of attributing a statement or argument to an opponent that they didn't actually make, then attacking it. This is more effective when the "opponent" is either not around to defend himself or is a collection of people rather than an individual. When called on this chicanery, simply aver that the caller simply doesn't get it, preferably while disparaging his intelligence.
Example(*):
Commenter #1: Capitalists have been claiming for years that getting rid of all regulation over private industry would ensure economic growth. Clearly this has not happened, and they look like fools for ever having said it.
Commenter #2: When has anyone anywhere ever claimed that? And you do realize that Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae were some of the most heavily regulated entities in history. And that they were overseen directly by Congress. And that they still failed?
Commenter #1: If you're too stupid to do your own research don't expect me to do it for you. The evidence is everywhere and anyone with half a brain knows it.
Congratulations Commenter #1! You have mastered the art of the Strawman/Ad Hominem attack combo move! You are a winner!
(*) The conversation that follows was definitely not inspired by an actual exchange I once had. Nope, not at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)