3 ms·
Sometimes it might be better to wait and see if a problem arises rather than preemptively legislating it in a way that might do far more harm than the anticipat
by houseabsolute 16y ago
Sometimes it might be better to wait and see if a problem arises rather than preemptively legislating it in a way that might do far more harm than the anticipated problem.
- carbocation 16y agoAbsolutely! Hence my strong agreement on taxis and my rambling uncertainty about cosmetologists.
- houseabsolute 16y agoI thought you felt that way, but I wanted to make it explicit for the readers because there was some ambiguity. :)
- carbocation 16y agoCheers; thank you for nudging me to express myself more clearly!
- gojomo 16y agoIndeed. And not only is it good to wait until problems occur, but it is also good even after a problem occurs to wait to see how businesses and their customers adjust, rather than assume that every new problem needs a regulatory solution. Once a problem occurs, and gets enough media coverage to drive regulation, it has also achieved enough awareness to become a point of marketing/competition/consumer-activism. That might be enough to control the risk, even without official state inspectors/licensors/bureaucrats. Especially in the modern era of costless sharing/archiving/finding of customer reviews and discussion.
- vermontdevil 16y agoThe state government is using this 'sanitary' issue as a pretext to intervene on behalf of the hotel industry that they have beholden themselves to.