GOP senator: Let restaurants ‘opt out’ of handwashing after toilet to ‘reduce regulatory burden’
The STUPIDITY is here.
Because "regulatory burden" is soo much worse than sickness, death, grossly polluted drinking water, rotten food, dangerous working conditions, deadly cars, etc. etc. Regulations come into being because of bad behavior by people or because of dangerous conditions that could be prevented but haven't been.
Because "regulatory burden" is soo much worse than sickness, death, grossly polluted drinking water, rotten food, dangerous working conditions, deadly cars, etc. etc. Regulations come into being because of bad behavior by people or because of dangerous conditions that could be prevented but haven't been.
But, by all means FREEDUMB! The FREEDUMB to die early because of someone else's selfishness or ignorance is enshrined in the Constitution. Really? Well, I happen to believe most "regulatory burden" exists to ensure that right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that is an actual Constitutional right. But that's just silly ole me, I guess.
The Daily Banter noted this:
That wasn’t the truly dumb part of Tillis’ idea.
“I said: ‘I don’t have any problem with Starbucks if they choose to opt out of this policy as long as they post a sign that says “We don’t require our employees to wash their hands after leaving the restroom,” Tillis said.
So, businesses can opt out of the law, but they’re forced by law to put up a sign that says they opted out. Hmm. Okay. In other words, Tillis is trading one regulation for another regulation, only his regulation doesn’t necessarily help anyone. Given the choice between the pair of regulations, since Tillis’ idea creates a new regulation, which would you prefer? Any sane human would take the first one, of course. It takes a special kind of stupid to believe that upon arriving at a restaurant every customer goes to the bathroom to check the hand-washing policy. It seems as if the only people who would know about the opt-out decision would be those who make a b-line for the crapper before sitting down to eat. Everyone else would have to roll the dice on how the staff washed up.
The Daily Banter noted this:
That wasn’t the truly dumb part of Tillis’ idea.
“I said: ‘I don’t have any problem with Starbucks if they choose to opt out of this policy as long as they post a sign that says “We don’t require our employees to wash their hands after leaving the restroom,” Tillis said.
So, businesses can opt out of the law, but they’re forced by law to put up a sign that says they opted out. Hmm. Okay. In other words, Tillis is trading one regulation for another regulation, only his regulation doesn’t necessarily help anyone. Given the choice between the pair of regulations, since Tillis’ idea creates a new regulation, which would you prefer? Any sane human would take the first one, of course. It takes a special kind of stupid to believe that upon arriving at a restaurant every customer goes to the bathroom to check the hand-washing policy. It seems as if the only people who would know about the opt-out decision would be those who make a b-line for the crapper before sitting down to eat. Everyone else would have to roll the dice on how the staff washed up.
