3 ms·

You mean protecting wealthy incumbents? I'd argue it is working as it is designed to ("should" is a whole different barrel of fish). I've lived in both the US

You mean protecting wealthy incumbents? I'd argue it is working as it is designed to ("should" is a whole different barrel of fish). I've lived in both the US and EU, and counter-intuitively the amount of incumbent regulatory capture* in the US seems worse, even though one would assume it would be quite the other way around. The US has a population that is "anti-regulation" and a pro-capitalism agenda. You'd think it would result in a highly competitive landscape, but instead it results in many duopolies. *Edited

ISL 8y ago
The term I think you're looking for is "regulatory capture": https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/episode-381-why-its-illegal-to-braid-hair-without-a-license https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/06/22/155596305/epis...
ekianjo 8y ago
> amount of incumbent regulatory protectionism Call it what it is: Crony Capitalism. Lobby all you can to cement your market position and prevent competition. Works pretty well, because politicians are corrupt and like to be showered with lobby money.