>Do I believe that regulation, just like any other bureaucracy, can get too cumbersome to handle, yes.
>
>So which regulations do you think are too cumdersome to handle?

Any to which my first response is "Well, that's stupid." or protects stupid people from themselves so they survive to find another stupid person and produce more stupid people. And by stupid, I mean those that don't get that hot coffee is hot, that it's not a good idea to use your hair dryer in the tub or shower. These things cost everyone money. If I'm remembering correctly, that little tag on the hair dryer added something along the lines of 2$ or more to the purchase price of the item. Or regulations that countermand other regulations, yet both (or more) are in force. "You must to A and B, but A's requirements are is in direct conflict with B's."

>
>Do I believe that trusting the corporation to look out for the rights of the individual, oh hell no! (and I mean that 'oh hell no' in ALL the Southern connotations).
>

Please, quit assuming that everything I'm saying is aimed at you and your business. And also, please quit assuming that my generalities are specificities.

>That is a shame. Andy and I are a very small company, but we really do look out for our clients because we have integrity. We have both fired clients who pissed and moaned about our invoices because we do not want any client who do not think that they have gotten exceptional value for the money they have spent. I like to think that other companies operate like this because of mutual enlightened self interest. If you don't treat your customer right, they will not be your customer for long.
>
>Reminding you that I am a Liberal Republican,
>
>What does that mean, exactly?

That means I'm a fiscal conservative (more or less) but a social liberal. I do believe there should be a safety net in place for those who need it. Notice I say 'need', not 'want'.
>
>Do I think that we, as a government, need to take a REALLY good look at all of the Agencies and bring them into, at least, the 20th century? Certainly. Just as I believe one should revisit any software application that's been in continual use every 5 years, I think that every 50 years or so (ymmv) we should look at every agency and get rid of rules and regs that no longer apply, streamline those (if necessary) that do still apply and just clean up after ourselves in general.
>
>I think that every 50 years is way too long to wait.

I'm figuring it'll take 50 years for the first pass through, but please notice, again, the 'your mileage (timespan) may differ' that I had in there.