For the longest time, it has been the contention of most members of the GOP and many Blue Dog Democrats that undue regulation stifles job growth. That word undue usually means anything that safeguards the public or workers. Loosen the regulations, we're told, and the job market will explode and good times will be had by all.
What rarely is mentioned in this formulation are the costs to society. It's as if they don't exist at all. Take a look at any industry or profession in which regulation is lacking and this lack invariably leaves carnage in its wake. Yes, it could conceivably lead to more jobs, but society as a whole must deal with AND pay for the mess that is created.
For example, many of the regulations concerning derivatives were dismantled in the Clinton and Bush years. While these actions may indeed have opened the door for more hedge fund managers than before (i.e., job growth in this sector), the removal of these important regulations has, in large part, led to the current financial meltdown. While a few people have become egregiously rich, the vast majority of citizens have suffered mightily...with no end in sight!!
Earlier this afternoon, in the post Upside Down, I utilized the workers at my local grocery store to make a point. Let's utilize the example of a grocery store in this discussion of regulations.
Would you want to shop at a grocery store in which none of the products were labeled? Everywhere you looked there would be rows and rows of nondescript cans and packages. Back in the meat department, there would be no rules about maintaining sanitary conditions. In the store pharmacy, there would be no regulations about who could or couldn't work there. And there would no wage requirements for the workers or safety regulations to benefit the customers either.
Would you shop at such a store?
My guess is that most every person reading this would answer with a resounding NO. We want to know what we're purchasing and what's in it. We want to insure all food items are handled in a safe and sanitary manner. We want experienced and knowledgeable people to dispense our prescriptions. We want workers who care about their job. And we certainly don't want to be needlessly injured or killed while shopping in the store.
Yes, if none of these type of regulations existed, then there might be more jobs available, but the trade-off of possibly a few less jobs for more public confidence and safety is worth it's weight in gold. Regulations are of vital importance to keep the strong from obliterating the faceless weak.
Is every regulation on the books needed? Of course not! As with everything in a human-based society, there will be redundancies and trivialities. It should be the task of government officials regularly to review the various regulations in their purview to insure they are needed and serve their designed purpose.
That said, if we want to continue to live in a democratic and safe environment, it is far better to err on the side of too many regulations than not enough.
What rarely is mentioned in this formulation are the costs to society. It's as if they don't exist at all. Take a look at any industry or profession in which regulation is lacking and this lack invariably leaves carnage in its wake. Yes, it could conceivably lead to more jobs, but society as a whole must deal with AND pay for the mess that is created.
For example, many of the regulations concerning derivatives were dismantled in the Clinton and Bush years. While these actions may indeed have opened the door for more hedge fund managers than before (i.e., job growth in this sector), the removal of these important regulations has, in large part, led to the current financial meltdown. While a few people have become egregiously rich, the vast majority of citizens have suffered mightily...with no end in sight!!
Earlier this afternoon, in the post Upside Down, I utilized the workers at my local grocery store to make a point. Let's utilize the example of a grocery store in this discussion of regulations.
Would you want to shop at a grocery store in which none of the products were labeled? Everywhere you looked there would be rows and rows of nondescript cans and packages. Back in the meat department, there would be no rules about maintaining sanitary conditions. In the store pharmacy, there would be no regulations about who could or couldn't work there. And there would no wage requirements for the workers or safety regulations to benefit the customers either.
Would you shop at such a store?
My guess is that most every person reading this would answer with a resounding NO. We want to know what we're purchasing and what's in it. We want to insure all food items are handled in a safe and sanitary manner. We want experienced and knowledgeable people to dispense our prescriptions. We want workers who care about their job. And we certainly don't want to be needlessly injured or killed while shopping in the store.
Yes, if none of these type of regulations existed, then there might be more jobs available, but the trade-off of possibly a few less jobs for more public confidence and safety is worth it's weight in gold. Regulations are of vital importance to keep the strong from obliterating the faceless weak.
Is every regulation on the books needed? Of course not! As with everything in a human-based society, there will be redundancies and trivialities. It should be the task of government officials regularly to review the various regulations in their purview to insure they are needed and serve their designed purpose.
That said, if we want to continue to live in a democratic and safe environment, it is far better to err on the side of too many regulations than not enough.
I would not shop in a store with no labels, no sanitary conditions and so forth. On the other hand even in the absence of rules there would be an incentive for a smart store owner to realize that labels, fair pricing, sanitary conditions and so forth are good for business. The market works.
ReplyDeleteThis is not to say that regulation is not needed. There are situations of unequal information that need to be regulated. However I disagree that it is automatically better to live in an over regulated society.