tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9263167.post6567607921451855582..comments2024-03-28T15:17:43.056-04:00Comments on Stayin' Alive: Oppressive government regulationsCervanteshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11302076828795198187noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9263167.post-21992807248733028272012-06-27T14:23:03.832-04:002012-06-27T14:23:03.832-04:00I fully match with whatever thing you have present...I fully match with whatever thing you have presented us.jordanhousesc.orghttp://jordanhousesc.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9263167.post-16009949932987581232011-12-09T09:08:04.613-05:002011-12-09T09:08:04.613-05:00I have a point to make here. It turns out that gov...I have a point to make here. It turns out that government regulation doesn't actually "kill jobs," at least not in this case.xlpharmacy reviewshttp://www.xlpharmacy-reviews.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9263167.post-2634174873696483182011-09-23T13:26:29.216-04:002011-09-23T13:26:29.216-04:00Indeed Daniel, some regulations have a net benefit...Indeed Daniel, some regulations have a net benefit, others a net cost. Deciding which are which, of course, requires that you put a value on each side of the equation and people may disagree about that. Some people don't give a FFOARD about lonely rodents, others couldn't care less about clean rivers. <br /><br />What's objectionable is making generalities, like "We need to lift the regulatory burden from business to start creating more jobs." As a proposition, that just isn't true. Although there could well be specific regulations that are counterproductive -- no doubt there are many that I would want to see eliminated or modified -- there are others that we should keep, and yet others that we should add. It all depends, it's not a general principle the way Republicans are claiming.Cervanteshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11302076828795198187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9263167.post-25979219347171115032011-09-22T20:20:44.773-04:002011-09-22T20:20:44.773-04:00One point I'd add is that the regulation, e.g....One point I'd add is that the regulation, e.g. pollution abatement equipment, does increase the cost of the items produced. Potentially less are produced (fewer sold at a marginally higher cost) which may reduce employment. I'm not sure if this is a wash or not.<br /><br />This could be seen as an additional benefit though. Externalized costs make the purchase price of products cheaper which increases consumption. We (developed world) are over consumers and less consumption of many items is probably a good idea... IMO. <br /><br />But this seems like a complicated issue. Some regulations probably do provide no benefits. Why keep those regs around? I suspect there are numerous regulations designed to protect special business/corporate interests from competition. Here's an example... a regulation that prevents Medicare from negotiating directly with drug manufacturers. Let's encourage the Republicans to dump that one.Danielnoreply@blogger.com