Quote
Originally posted by: DonDiegoQuote
Originally posted by: arshaleign
Sorry to interrupt your crime-violence-porn DonDiego, but it seems everyone wants to know: What does government regulation have to do with the topic of two thugs beating up a store clerk?
Ahh, . . . it isn't so much "government regulation", . . . it is the replacement of the Rule of Law by selective government regulation or even simple government fiat to further, for example, cronyism and political goals not obtainable through the rule of law.
DonDiego proposes as the rule of law is undermined, lawlessness and thuggery may become evermore the norm.
Here's an example.
There is a Labor Law, the Federal WARN Act of 1988, which requires that a Company above a certain size planning significant layoffs must notify the workers of this planned layoff 60-days in advance. This notification is not a suggestion. It is not a choice left up to Company management. It is not an option. It is The Law.
The presently anticipated "sequestration", the across-the-board budget cuts to the US Federal Budget, will affect Contracts with several Companies large enough to be covered by the aforementioned Labor Law and which will respond to the cut-off in funds by immediate significant layoffs. So these Companies intend to notify their employees
in accordance with the Law, 60 days prior to the anticipated layoffs.
Inquires to the Labor Department over the last few weeks indicated that the Department had no power to alter the law.
But Somebody talked to them. The Department of Labor on Monday notified the Companies which would be affected that the Law does not apply to them
this time.
No one changed the Law. No one amended the Law. A Department of the Executive Branch of the US Government just stated
the Law does not apply.
By coincidence, it turns out the Law would require that the notifications go out right around the Friday before Election Day.
But the Law does not apply. He Who Shall Be Obeyed Has Said So.
Just another nail in the coffin.
Ref: Bloomberg
