> You see the benefits of regulation but not the costs In my defense, I plainly asked about the outcomes and the costs. My point is that we need serious inform

> You see the benefits of regulation but not the costs In my defense, I plainly asked about the outcomes and the costs. My point is that we need serious information, not more speculation. The parent comment omits the costs of a lack of regulation, such as sickness for diners, spread of disease, injury for workers, etc. But the question is not can we speculatively come up with costs and benefits, but how much do these things actually cost and benefit us? > This has been abundantly studied, contrary to your post I didn't say that. I said there is no well-known information. Could you point to some? > govt is not a productive enterprise and so nothing it does can help businesses produce things of value I don't agree at all. In fact, government performs much that helps business produce value. Look at the benefits from NASA, medical research, scientific research (Albert Einstein wasn't a private entrepreneur) ... fracking, IIRC, is the product of government research, as is much of the energy industry ... the entire foundation of the Internet and web is mostly from government institutions (ARPA, CERN, U of Illinois, and many more). And for much of the period of the West's greatest growth, the 1950s and 1960s, government ran businesses, and regulated and taxed at rates that seem astronomical today. Government also provides (produces) systems of laws, regulations, roads, security, education, health, and other things that are absolutely necessary for and greatly enhance business. Without education and health, who would be working for the businesses and buying their goods? Without roads, how would they ship? Without law and regulation, who would feel safe buying from them and how would disputes be resolved? Without the military, how would international shipping lanes supply all those goods?