I hate how they regulate the useage of pesticides like DDT so I don't get sick from eating vegetables.
I hate how they regulate drug trials so Tylenol doesn't kill me.
Look, I disagree with the point you're making anyway, but for the love of Bob, at least
try to have arguments that make some sense and aren't completely wrong on their face.
1. Pesticides are next to completely unregulated. There are some 3500 in use, of which about 50 have been tested. Wash your veggies before you eat them.
2. DDT is not harmful to humans except in
very large quantities. Back in the 50's, some scientist ate teaspoonfuls of the stuff at a time to demonstrate this.
3. DDT was banned globally because it led to bird of prey eggshell thinning in the western hemisphere, especially in Texas and California. Meanwhile, 30+ million people in Africa have died of malaria since then, a disease DDT controlled exceptionally well. If we didn't know better, we'd accuse Rachel Carson of inciting genocide.
4. Tylenol will kill you in significantly lower dosages than DDT. If you powdered up some extra strength Tylenol pills and ate them like the aforementioned scientist did, you will destroy your liver in about 6 hours, resulting in the need for a liver transplant within days, or you die.
5. Tylenol was never put through FDA-approved clinical drug trials because it predates the imposition of those standards and was grandfathered in.
If you really think letting buisnesses have their way is the better option, I suggest you do some research on what life was like during the industrial revolution and turn of the century America. Sweatshop labor,
Banned after lobbying by mechanized businesses which still couldn't compete.
Not banned out of any altruism, but rather at union insistence, to raise wages.
Which has resulted in mass unemployment rather than wage cuts during recessions.
no breaks, 6 day work week, 10+ hours a day,
All of which were brought on after lobbying by big business - the workers preferred the longer hours because it meant increased pay. Big business wanted to cut payroll expenses and, by constricting the supply of goods that could be made in a 40 hour week, raise prices
Untrue, except for health insurance, which wasn't necessary at the time because health care costs were so low. It barely existed until the wage (but not benefit) controls of WWII.
no health care, no middle class.
Outright lies. Not necessarily yours, of course, I'm sure you're just parroting what you've been taught, utterly wrong as it is.
The rich did really well, the rest? Not so much.
Such is true in every era, but most so when government has more power to steal from the little guy.
