Government overreach - UK, Brazil, China, EU, California authoritarian leftists going full 1984

One of the tells of how libertarianism is an ideology for white property owners is how they never were the leading activists to uncover things like cointelpro which is abject government over each violating the very basic constitutional rights of a certain group of citizens at a systemic level.

 

this is the government overreach examples thread. If you're looking for mask mandates and school shutdowns, you'll have better luck in the covid threads

 

racism

 

As I said.... Trivial. Your complaints are petty. The type of companions only a massive amount of leisure time can afford.

 

and yet here you and I are spending our leisure on a basketball forum

 

Yup. But my issues with the government doesn't make me sound like a human who never had a negative interaction in life ever. Like you have to admit your complaints about the government are rather low stakes compared to what other races and wealth classes of humans have to face in America.

People have issues. The issues you complain so it tells me that not only your trivial complaints are due to a leisurely privileged life but also a lack of empathy to understand that real problems exist for real people.

 

Hang on to just a few more months. November can’t get here soon enough for these clowns.

 

That is not a coherent question.

No. Doing perfectly nice things to poor people from East Timor on the third Thursday of a blood moon could also be an example of government overreach. Government overreach is unrelated to race, the personal financial situation of an individual involved, or whether the action is positive, negative, or neutral. What makes something government overreach is if the government is doing something more than what the proper role of government should be.

 

Whatever a government's role should be is subjective yes even with documentation like the constitution there is no objective acknowledgement of what the role of government is as the Constitution is a limited document that was meant to be expanded on to adapt to conditions the people who made the document couldn't plan for. It is impossible for a single document to create some objective definition of the role of government.


So if we can agree on the role of government being a subjective thing then I can say that subjectively I would be more concerned about overreach of government that is used to suppress people based on a desire to maintain status quo hierarchy system than let's say government overreach because people think a virus is very dangerous without hard immunity.

 

As there is no mathematically provable perfect form of government, the best we can do is have coherent political philosophies that we personally agree with. As such, what constitutes government overreach will be based on what political philosophy we follow.

Yes, we understand you are a communist.

 

in the white privilege government overreach sweepstakes, looks like CDC has adjusted some of their requirements for dogs coming from "low risk" or "rabies free" countries.

Privileged whites rejoice!!

From August 1, 2024, Onward: Entry Requirements for Dogs from Dog-Rabies Free or Low-Risk Countries

https://www.cdc.gov/importation/dog...ibCawE6Kp5LDofm-Bw_aem_rjh_UfEalJxHiZDx913Aqg

 

White Privilege for the Win!!

 

You are truly weird. I really don't even know what to say. There's more than a few screws loose up there.

 

CDC eases requirements for dogs entering US

https://thehill.com/changing-americ...-cdc-eases-requirements-for-dogs-entering-us/

excerpt:

Fourteen U.S. senators wrote a letter asking the CDC to delay some of the previously imposed restrictions that would make it complicated for those who often cross the U.S.-Canadian border.

The previous rules announced in May stipulated that all dogs entering the U.S. must be at least 6 months old and have a microchip as well as completed import forms. Now, dogs that have only been in rabies-free or low-risk countries in the past six months will only need to appear healthy and have completed import forms.
​

more at the link

https://www.collins.senate.gov/imo/...tter_to_cdc_re_dog_importation_rule_final.pdf



@rocketsjudoka

 

Not sure why I'm being tagged here as this isn't an issue I've been barking up a tree about this seems like it's your pet issue.

 

I haven't followed closely either, but it sounds like the CDC takes public input and adjusts requirements?

One of the arguments against the Court making decisions instead of a regulatory state is that the Court doesn't take input from regular people; it only hears from lawyers representing well-funded organizations. The government, on the other hand, usually has a period (ranging from months to sometimes years) to gather public input. While they don't always get it right (or more accurately, people aren't always happy with the outcome), the public does have a voice and can vote out "policies" they disagree with. This isn't the case with the Court.

 

one of the complaints in this particular case (the Senate letter mentions) is that CDC did not include a second round of public comment that might have caught all these objections before they issued the final regulations:

 

Good, it again shows that they need to take public comments into account, something that is effectively not possible when the Court is making "regulatory" decisions.