3 ms·

I suppose. Though I'm sure requiring excessive insurance would be attacked as too much regulation.

• chroma 10y ago
  You could have both regulation paths: Either you build according to code, or you build whatever you want so long as it has plenty of liability insurance. As a side note, I really wish more of these sorts of alternate regulations existed. They would be very useful fallbacks for when regulations become outdated or overly restrictive. Another concrete example of this is automobiles. Right now in the US, you can't bring a consumer car to market without extensive crash testing from the NHTSA and fuel economy tests from the EPA. These high fixed costs eliminate enthusiast and niche manufacturers. If the law said, "Any model that doesn't pass these tests incurs a $10k (or 25% or whatever is onerous enough) tax on each vehicle.", it would allow for new manufacturers to enter the market with far less capital.
  • BurningFrog 10y ago
    Many cynics and economists would tell you that eliminating small competitors is the purpose of many of these regulations.