3 ms·

> What are the outcomes for using insurance, and what are the outcomes for using regulation? Bad question, false dichotomy: these are not apples-to-apples comp

• Nomentatus 9y ago
  Even "insurance" is a distraction, the argument is really about tort law (which raises the insurance rates, case by case.) Note that ordinary risks aren't economically insurable, almost by definition, so corporations insure far less than most people would guess. A building burning down is an ordinary risk for a conglomerate so it may not be insured - insurance is too expensive since the company can more cheaply absorb the risk itself.) So I agree: yes, the existence of tort law sometimes obviates the need for regulation; but has hardly banished regulation or the need for it entire!