CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Has he? I dunno exactly or specifically, but I hope so. Business now have the rights to marry and pool all of their extra funds into campaign contributions. They are not human beings by themselves, but collections of human beings founded on the ideal of greed and better living, which can expand infinitely based on their profit.
Big business deserves to be hurt, because for your God's sake, they've barely been stopped from killing and ruining the lives of innocent people already. They still do. My dad is an older man, within retirement age, but unfortunately for him, he has been enslaved to a big business.
If Obama is hurting business, then GO OBAMA. STICK IT TO THOSE ASSHOLES.
That's called enslavement. He has to work there to help him and my mother eat. He can't go anywhere else because there is no competition that will hire him, despite the fact that he a veteran mechanic.
Not only that, but since they are his only option, they can treat him any way they want to, such as nearly working him to death several times.
If the president is hurting business, then that's a good thing. It stops people from being enslaved.
Yes but, it also makes people stop making money, witch makes people poor. Would you rather make it so they can't eat? So, you want your mom and dad to starve to death. It wouldn't be his only option if businesses was Strong enough to hirer people. But since Obama is hurting business they can't!
No it doesn't. Business has been too strong since the dawn of American capitalism. All they've ever done is be greedy. From the old robber barons to monopolies, they have ruined people's lives and nearly taken over the country. We don't have homeless people because business are hurting, we have homeless people because business is tyrannical.
No, I don't want my senior parents to starve to death, jackass. But my father shouldn't have to live out his last days in utter misery, his only comfort knowing that his children might not suffer the same fate as his. It's wrong for a big business to do that to him. He's worked so hard all his life, he deserves a mercy like retirement or SSI.
The lack of competition has nothing to do with the president. The big business itself eliminated the competition by itself, because previous presidents didn't care to combat it's power enough. Obama STILL hasn't damaged it enough. I know these people who run this company: they don't do shit because they're trying to financially stay on their feet, they have plenty of profit to do that. No. They do it all to squeeze out as much money as they can out of every employee.
My dad and millions of others work for Businesses and are quite happy to be employed. They are smart enough to realize that doing actual work is beater than starving to death. But it's apparent you would rather see all your loved ones die, horrible deaths, then have the economy get back on it's feet.
P.S. My dad's the "Director of Financial Analysis and Budgeting."
Wow, you're an Upper-Class snobby piece of shit. Putting words in my mouth AND the mouths of millions of people you don't know. It must've taken so much thought to do that, didn't it?
Let me tell you this, you dumb twat, I love my family. My entire argument is that businesses aren't supposed to enslave their workers and make them miserable because they are the worker's only way to eat. It's wrong, and you are a fucking cunt for saying that I want my family to starve.
But what you really have said is that you want my family and all other unfortunate, Middle-Class families to be enslaved to. Eating isn't bad, but saying that they should eat and be miserable for the rest of their lives or die is fucking facism.
You're a Nazi if you think businesses should have the power to do that to people.
I'm not in the upper class. I'm in the middle class, and yet no one I know is enslaved. In fact every one I know is quite grateful to be employed. You must be very greedy if yo want even more from the poor businesses that are just trying to stay afloat. In fact every one I now would probably think your a horrible person. And you are.
Are you fucking retarded? I have been arguing this whole time against BIG BUSINESS. That's apparent! So, you must be stupid or a complete asshole for lumping me in with greed. I'm betting you're just stupid.
Are you so naive as to think that just because the people you know aren't suffering means that there aren't people suffering at all? In my hometown, big businesses had destroyed all of the small ones, forcing laborers to work under them as their only choice to get by in life, forcing these laborers to nearly work themselves to death and suffer being emotionally and psychologically abused by their superiors, all for the minimum fucking wage.
Because of big business, people have to be homeless and starving or almost homeless, miserable, but just barely not starving.
How fucking DARE you talk to me like I'm trying to take something important from the world! I never once advocated that small business was bad you dumbass! If anyone here is horrible, it's you! You are a person who believes that it's right for giant corporations to form monopolies and trusts and ravage entire towns and communities by raping the Middle Class of their hometown businesses and taking over all of the aspects of their lives!
Fuck. You.
You ignorant piece of shit.
You cannot deny the existence of suffering just because you haven't seen it with your own eyes.
I have seen suffering. I've seen starvation, pestilence, disease, and death. But it's not cased by big business. Oh no. It's caused by a lack of big business. There are people in the world praying for more corporations. Why? Because in there country, there is so little business that almost no one is employed. Which means almost no one can buy food. And there is almost no where, where they can buy food. You are trying to take something important in the world away, these starving People are prof. If you ask any one of them if they'd like to do hard work like your dad dose instead of starving to death they would all think of it as a miracle. Thats the problem with you. You think your dad's the unlucky one. Have you ever tried starving to death? Doing what your dad is doing is a much better alternative.
But it's not cased by big business. Oh no. It's caused by a lack of big business...
You think that homeless, starving people in third world countries pray for corporations to come around and save them? No. They pray for anyone to come along and save them, you twat. Don't act like you know what it's like to suffer like them. You don't know what they think about anything.
Corporations do not care about helping people. The only reason a person lets their corporation get huge to a point where they have more money then they need is because they are greedy, self-serving assholes. There's no other reason to have so much money! There is no selflessness behind it unless you give EVERY last penny of it away!
So don't think that you can assert that lack of big business is the reason for third world poverty and starvation. Big business doesn't give a shit about people needs. They only want money. Big businesses with good intentions don't exist because the more cunning, evil, ruthless businesses took advantage of their good-intentioned naivety and destroyed them.
You have good intentions, thinking that people with lots of money are likely to be good people who want to use it for good, but I'm afraid you are mistake young man. If more power to business would help the world and the needy and the starving, then I'd want them to have power.
But that's not how the world works. That's never how it's worked.
I don't think that people with lots of money are likely to be good. I just think that in the coerce of doing business, they will hire people, pay them the money they need, and sell them goods and services that they need. And plus they're fun! Having the government run every thing, no. That's boring. Corporations are FUN!
That's silly thing to say. I'd rather our democratic government feed and employ poor starving people then let our humongous businesses feed and enslave poor and starving people. Once again, I have more faith in the government then in capitolism, and you seem to agree that giant corporation is nothing but greed, no? They aren't needed to provide starving people with a good life, so why let them have more and more power to effective control the country and world?
They are effectively miniature dictatorships, led by kings who rule over vast lands of private property, housed within other countries by disguising themselves as 'businesses'. Well, big 'business' is just a figure of speech for 'miniature monarchy'. That's the kind of power we give to big corporations in this country, and it shouldn't be that way. We shouldn't need Labor Unions to get right for laborers!
They are not nothing but greed. Greed is just the incentive. If your doing good, dose it really matter why?
And there not dictatorships. There objects that people own, based on how much stock they have. Anyone can do what they want with anything they own, as long as it's legal. Labor unions are what's evil.
Yes they are. The only reason to make a company humongous is so you can make money you don't need. There is a certain threshold of wealth at which you and your loved ones will have a convenient way of life until the day you die. But that's not what corporation owners do. They keep building and expanding and making money, personal money they will never totally use to help anyone but themselves and maybe their loved ones. If corporations weren't greedy, they wouldn't be in control of our economy, because if they weren't greedy, they wouldn't want to control our economy. But they do. They want it all. They like having everything and owning as much as they can. If they didn't want to, then corporations would not exist! They would all be small businesses that support the Middle Class town by town!
Not all big businesses are dictatorships, no, but for the most part, they at least have the rights to be. Put some critical thinking into this. They are led by a single or small group of individuals, like dictatorships. They own vast land which cannot be trespassed upon without the proper legal negotiation, like dictatorships. They control the lives of huge sums of people to the point of depleting them of all other options but themselves, like a dictatorship. They may set up treaties (contracts) with anyone and since they have the money and power, they can force people to give in to their wants, like a dictatorship.
Have you ever heard of the company ENRON? They were a company that went bankrupt in the past 20 or so years. You wanna know how much power they had? Not only did they control a monopoly, but then temporarilty stole almost all of the electric power out of California, nearly ending all order and stability in the state. Luckily, they got hammered by the government, and then nobody wanted to help them when they went bankrupt. Now, the country, especially California, is much better off.
Now, prepare for me to curse at you exorbitantly for your last sentence.
(Do not read the next paragraph, it is fueled by justifiable but uncalled for rage. There will be an apology at the end.)
You motherfucking, ass-muching sack of shit, if you believe for a second that suffering laborers are evil, then you are destined to burn in that Hell place you believe in until the end of time. Laborers are abused and molested of their rights by humongous businesses, worked to death and made to starve when they can't go on any longer. Getting their families lives destroyed and getting themselves into suicidally-horrific depression over how they miserable they are being slaves to rich motherfucking cats. They are people raped of all of their happiness by self-serving, greedy assholes who only care about ruling the world one dollar at a time.
You are a disgusting, miserable excuse for a person. Go crawl into a corner and die you fucking Nazi.
(End rage-filled rant)
P.S. Pick your words carefully. You can't possibly be an extremely evil person. Nobody is that evil. So I apologize, greatly. When I am angry, I don't say things that highlight how I really feel on the inside. If you would excuse the rudeness and give a justifiable argument to back up your final sentence, that would be super. Once again, I apologize.
So, you little smart ass, you were being satirical the whole time? Well, I've never been not gullible so... good job. You may kindly blow it out your ass for tricking me.
Most people are quite happy when a corporation moves to there town. Have you ever herd of a TV show called "Tech Now"? This week on one of the segments, people in Sunnyvale, Ca, were saying how good it is that all these company's were moving in to there town. The mayor was saying that they are beneficial to every one and that they really could us more of them. People ruining small businesses were saying how much business they were getting. They all seem to like big business, so when you say that it's evil, it proves that your a greedy, selfish person
Right, because television reflects the views and experiences of every single last person in this country and other capitalist countries.
Once, again, you missed my point, on several occasions. You are naive. Just because you cannot perceive something with your own senses does not mean that it does not exist in bulk. Just because you haven't seen the suffering rampant capitalism has caused doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
Guess what: It happens. All the time. Every day. Every second of the day.
You have seen very little in your life if you can arrogantly assert that just because you haven't experienced something doesn't mean that others haven't experienced it yet.
I will admit, big business sometimes does help. But all of the good things they provide could be provided by totally different sources then big business. The difference is that big business abuses laborers and communities, because the only purpose of a business getting that giant is for the purpose of having what you don't and will never need.
That's what greed is.
I advocate never having more then what you will never need or use.
Now, you dumb prick, you get to give me a logical explanation over how exactly I'm 'greedy' in comparison to rich fat cats that run big businesses, all of which horde at least a little of their money and never use it for anything whatsoever until the day they die.
Your greedy because, almost everyone in the world likes big business, but because your dad has to do actual work, you think it should be taken away from everyone.
No, in this world, some people like big business, many people hate big business, and the rest have no opinion about big business. Don't act like you know what people are thinking, because you aren't Superman.
No, I don't think business should be taken away from the world. I think extraordinary power, on the other hand, should be taken away from big business. I have already said this.
Also, about my father, go fuck yourself. He's a senior citizen and worked all his life. He doesn't deserve to come home to my mother 6 days out of 7 miserable because he's in physical pain so excruciating that he can't form coherent thoughts. Do you think it's right for people to be physically and psychologically abused to the point of absolute misery? To go through it and have no choice? If so, you are an evil peice of shit who deserves to be sodomized.
Also, how is greed defined by wanting to take something away from the world? It would be defined that way if I was taking it for myself, but I don't want to and you never said I wanted to either. Get your words right.
Your talking like he's enslaved, but he's not working one day out of seven! How lazy is he? How is working a few hours a day, 6 days a week enslavement? You are all very lazy people.
He's a senior citizen, and he works 12 to 15 hour days you cunt. Because of their contract with their workers, they can make him work even longer then that whenever they want also, which they do, all the time. As a senior, he also suffers from chronic pain of many times and larger severity, and they don't give a shit. They take as much work out of him as is possible without killing him.
You motherfucker. Lazy my asshole. That is enslavement, and you are a goddamn Nazi. Nothing but.
Well of coerce they can make him work longer! It just makes it more convenient for all off them. Only 12 to 15 hours? I would think at lest 20. 12 to 15 hours a day, 6 days a week is only 72 to 90 hours in total. Most of the time he has more than half of the week to himself to sleep and whatnot! Lazy, lazy, lazy!
You apparently have never worked 20 hours yourself 6 days a week yourself, Nazi. At this point, I'm fairly sure you're being satirical, but since you haven't admitted it, I am instead going to assume that you're serious, Mr. Nazi.
It's too bad that you believe in enslaving old men to be miserable until they die in bed. If you didn't, maybe everyone who reads these words of yours wouldn't consider you a heartless facist slaver.
No, you don't. He's miserable and has no time to himself but sleeping and sick days. He's been trying to get out for years because of the psychological abuse from his managers and the outrageous contracts that force him to work more against his will. And here's the thing: Every laborer in the factory has to work exactly the same way. It's abuse. You have a very limited idea of exactly how painful it is. But then again, you're obviously young.
I knew because you are saying things that are utterly insane and nonsensical... Well, I have no shame in being gullibile. At least it's good to know you aren't actually a Nazi.
Hurting business hurts everyone, though. I agree that corporations wield far, far too much power and need to be brought to heel, but damaging the economy would be a poor way to do it.
Then you missed my satirical point. I want him to hurt business because they have too much power already, because hurting them would only bring them to heel and do nothing to the economy since they're so powerful in the first place. Duuurh.
You can't hurt business without hurting the economy. Businesses support the economy. That's why we're in a recession. Because Obama is hurting business.
Um... yes you can. Businesses don't support the economy, consumers do. If all products in this country were manufactored and sold by the government, our economy would be more or less as equally stable as it is now, because we don't need corporations to supply us with goods, WE need to supply us with goods. Now, I'm not saying we should switch our entire market like that, but it was an example to show you that you are wrong. We don't need monopolies and robber barons to keep our economy going, we need only a steady flow of supply and demand, which doesn't necessarily need to be controlled by giant fucking companies.
So yes, you can hurt business without hurting the economy, you just have to do it correctly. So far, Obama hasn't hurt business properly yet, he's only done good for them, which annoys me.
Lastly, we're in a recession because of two wars and because giant companies raped the stock market with their risks. Idiot.
Simple: Do you have faith in your government? I hope so.
The entire purpose of government is organize and, in the case of US, protect and serve.
But the purpose of companies is to make money, and that's it. Once they reach a certain size, it doesn't matter what anyone says, they don't give a shit about anyone but themselves and maybe their loved ones. The only reason to make a company so big that you have more money then you can use is because you're a greedy douche.
I trust the intentions of our democratic government more then the intentions of our greedy monopolies and robber barons. As where our government has done all it can to give freedom over time to it's people, big corporations have only tried to leech as much money as they can out of it's employees over time.
But if the entire economy was run by the government, there'd be no competition.
I think we could definitely do with more government regulation on big business, but I don't want to see a government monopoly. I do trust the government, but not that far--after all, a government is a body of people, and being a government employee doesn't make you less susceptible to corruption than someone in the private sector.
Besides, competition fosters innovation. With regulation to channel that innovation towards the benefit of the consumer, that's definitely a good thing. For all their money-grubbing, corporate interests have given us a lot of neat stuff, ranging from video games and toys to new surgical procedures and medical equipment.
That said, I would not mind the government having a share in the economy--just not a controlling one.
I don't advocate government monopoly, that's just as bad as corporate monopoly.
I advocate big business being damaged to the point in which they don't control the lives of humongous sums of people to the point of slavery. With how this country has run capitalism in the past, big corporations are effectively miniature dictatorships, and politicians didn't try to stop them because they naively believed too much in corporate freedom.
We shouldn't need Labor Unions to stop people from being abused, but we do, because our capitalism fosters tremendous greed. It's horseshit.
As we have written before, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a report in August that said the stimulus bill has "[l]owered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points" and "[i]ncreased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million."
Simply put, more people would be unemployed if not for the stimulus bill. The exact number of jobs created and saved is difficult to estimate, but nonpartisan economists say there’s no doubt that the number is positive.
He has taxed the wealthy more, which hurts business. In stead of stealing from the rich and giving to the poor you should steal less from the rich, so they can employ the poor. Then the poor won't be poor very much longer, and they will have earned it.
It is truly pathetic that trickle down economics is still an valid argument.
If trickle down economics is used, it is really an invitation for more government intervention.
Trickle down economics is actually advocated by the interventionists and socialists where government wants more control of the economy, and the wish is being granted.
WHY?
The interventionists and socialists believe that if everyone is taxed and is forced into giving large amounts of money, the government will trickle or sprinkle the middle class and the poor with money.
It can be applied to power as well. If we grant daddy government more power to regulate and micromanage our lives, this power will trickle down to the rest of us.
Yet, historically, government's power and money doesn't trickle down. Government uses money and power and pours it into more bureaucracy and gives it to the elites such as the President, Congress, Fed and so forth.
The power is endless only, but it comes with an cost. Rather than helping, it distorts the economy and the disparity in income actually widens.
I voted this comment and the one it was responding to down. Not because I disagree, but because "Who voted this down" and "Someone too cowardly to type a dispute" don't support the Yes side and shouldn't count into the side score.
There really needs to be a "none" option for "you support this view."
wrong the rich are the ones stealing, they would rather pay millions to lobbyist to protect their wealth and interest than thousands to rebuild america.
For every dollar that is taxed and goes to Washington, that shrinks the economy, which hurts business and growth. Government can't create wealth or jobs; it can only transfer or redistribute wealth or jobs.
No, . The president had 3 problems he tried to address , and he has done nearly all he could without increasing the deficit even more . 1. stop the reduction of demand which was decreasing each month which costs jobs.He passed the stimulus and continued unemployment benefits, that helped demand from getting worse and costing more jobs.The problem it took some time to happen, did everyone really expect it to happen overnight, really, thats crazy.2. he had to put things in place to keep the same crazy things that hurt the economy long before he got into office from repeating as soon as things get right. Obviously some of these things are not popular to big business but the laws are to protect us the consumers and our interests not big business. 3. Invest in the country to spur some growth in the meantime until demand increases in the private sector, to cover us until the companies still around have balanced their balance sheets and can resume hiring. That he had to do through borrowing since no one supported tax increases. History shows this was what needed to be done. LOOK UP FDR AND WHAT WAS .DONE TO GET US OUT OF THE DEPRESSION. think where we would be without unemployemnt benefits and social security which did not exist during the depression AND ARE KEEPING DEMAND FROM GETTING WORSE. without them we would be in a depression.
If government can't create jobs why is the government the largest employer in the U.S. look it up.FDR gave out government jobs so that money could start to circulate during the depression at a healthy rate, thats what makes an economy money changing hands at a healthy rate within the country among the middle class. the rich cannot spend money fast enough to circulate and move the economy. Its a fact, money must circulate within the country it originates in to move the economy not be stockpiled or sent overseas to return as a loan. Thats why the government has expanded because for the last 30 years jobs have been contracting and the government to counteract it instead of passing a balanced trade bill began creating new offices filled with American citizen this allowed some cover from us having 15 and 20% unemployment for the last 10 years. THE REASON WE CAN'T AFFORD TO DO This any longer IS THE 30 BILLION DOLLAR a month TRADE DEFICIT AND SENIOR baby boomers WHO LOST THEIR 401K'S STILL IN THE JOB FORCE AND THE COST OF 2 WARS.Think about the reality of where we are not the rhetoric with no factual support. You really think the american auto industry should not have been saved. you don't see the 100's of thousands of workers in both the plants and service centers and part manufacturers that would be out of work or do you ever think of the thousands of retirees that depend on checks from the motor industry. those numbers alone would have increased unemployment by 2 points. every tax dollar that goes to Washington and is sent back to the middle or lower class through assistance, loans or job salaries maintains or creates deamnd , demand increases or maintains production, production maintains or creates jobs. not wealth not tax breaks....., why would I as a business owner hire more employees if there is no production need to do so. Why would I waste the extra money in my pocket from the tax cut I argued to get , if it does not return me a profit That would be bad business. demand is what spurs hiring not extra cash in the owners pocket (in fact I'd be more inclined to buy machinery that increases efficiency and reduces my workforce) no business works on that model of increasing workforce with no need for increased production because of no increase in demand.... increased demand creates jobs not tax breaks
Well it could be much worse - McCain couldv'e died and President Palin would be running the country into the ground. Aren't you glad that Obama is running the country instead of McCain?
How is Obama - who inherited 2 wars and the biggest debt ever - is the blame for two terms of Bush43?
Obama continues the same failed polices as Bush43.
We need to end the double decade old wars - that's what is killing the USA. The book by Sun Tzu called 'The Art of War' says that an extended war in a far away place will ruin the country. True then. True now.
Obama needs to ends the wars to fix the ecomony - he is working towards that ONLY becuase he wants to get re-elected. That's why he is planning the exit in Afganizstan timed with 2012. The same war criminal tactics of Nixon and Kissinger in Vietnam to win re-election
Well it could be much worse - McCain couldv'e died and President Palin would be running the country into the ground. Aren't you glad that Obama is running the country instead of McCain?
Obama is just as a central planner as is McCain. There is no difference.
I would rather people run the country instead of bureaucratic idiots. That is the problem, government is running the country.
I agree that the government has kind of made a muck of things, but what's the alternative? The way I understand it, much of our economic woe can be pinned on the burst of the credit and housing bubbles, which in turn can be pinned on the companies who were riding those bubbles. Could more regulation on business have prevented the recession, or at least softened the blow? Or were we just doomed?
the bubble just exasperated the problem we were losing jobs at a record pace to overseas factories before the bubble and then resumed to lose jobs after the bubble burst . lobbyist for big business did not want a balanced trade agreement with China because they knew they could make billions exploiting overseas labor and they did.
thanks to the supreme COURT they will control it even more. AND REMEMBER MITT SAYS CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE. NO TGHEY ARE RUN BY PEOPLE BUT THEIR GOAL IS MONEY FOR THEIR CORPORATION THE HELL WITH EVRYONE ELSE..
Sure, eventually, there will be improvement because after time, the markets readjust to what real prices and production should have been instead of artificial booms. The recession was created from the business cycle, the business cycle is the boom, the bust always follows. All created by the monetary expansion of credit and low interest rates. Creating money out of thin air is not real economic growth.
No, recession is not the fault of this president or the last, it is the Federal Reserve or Congress. An good economy is not readjusting markets, readjusting markets are the result of the bust from boom. Good economy is savings and investments. Not rationalize.
Every single President since Nixon has been Keynesian.
Then pray-tell, how do we distinguish a genuine boom from good economic policy?
There is no such thing as a genuine boom, all booms are bad.
The ideal economic policy, both for today and tomorrow, is very simple.
"Government should protect and defend against domestic and foreign aggression the lives and property of the persons under its jurisdiction, settle disputes that arise, and leave the people otherwise free to pursue their various goals and ends in life. No intervention in the market. Governments today are often asked to regulate and control production, to raise the prices of some goods and services and to lower the prices of others, to fix wages, to help some businesses get started and to keep others from failing, to encourage or hamper imports and exports, to care for the sick and the elderly, to support the profligate, and so on and on and on." ---Mises
Obama has done what he needs to like taking out troops and getting the economy to come back on its feet. Probably we will have to wait and see now if he does hurt business as this is the time where he will start to actually look into the economical activities more thoroughly at
Obama is doing all he can to help this country, but congress has taken a hold on him and they're not letting anything through. they'll do all they can to make Obama look bad, that way noone will want him reelected and the sad thing is that this is probably is what is going to happen. people choose to be ignorant and choose not to care. this is why our country is having its problems because the people and standing up for what is theirs. All you people on here talk about the problems of this country but how many of you have done something about it? Thomas Jefferson said, This country needs a revolution every two generations to keep the government and politics honest. Where is our revolution?
Obama has passed less regulations than Bush had by the same time in his presidency. Also, of the 7,247 mass layoffs last year -- those involving at least 50 workers -- 18 were the result of government regulation, according to department data. Of the 3,114 mass layoffs in the first half of this year, 11 were related to government regulation. By comparison, 1,053 mass layoffs were attributed to business demand.
