I agree - good regulation is worth a lot. Good regulations prevent potentially catastrophic situations. For example, good fire regulations help prevent whole c

I agree - good regulation is worth a lot. Good regulations prevent potentially catastrophic situations. For example, good fire regulations help prevent whole cities from burning down. It's also hard to sell people on prevention when they haven't been through disasters themselves. Unless they have direct experience then, in general, people have trouble understanding just how bad things can get. I'd love to see, as an experiment, having laws written with a preamble explaining the context and goals of that particular law, with the intent of qualifying the purpose of the law. Then there would be something stating how to quantify that law... in other words. That way there are clear statements of the intended purpose and intended effect of the law. Finally, the law would be set with a re-evaluation date, or maybe an expiration date, and, if the goals were not met, then the law would be up for debate again. Then the cycle repeats, maybe with a longer delay each time, until the law just gets passed without debate every time. I know it's unrealistic. It would be a difficult way to get anything passed, but a culture would build up around this system, just like the current U.S. system, and every other major political system, and it would eventually work. And, the important thing, it would make a lot of the current system much more explicit, bring a lot of stuff to light, and I think we'd end up with much better laws and regulations in general.