2 ms·
The point is what the GP said: “It's a way better choice to be in a future where we are arguing about the extent and content of the regulation rather than the p
by abduhl 6y ago
The point is what the GP said: “It's a way better choice to be in a future where we are arguing about the extent and content of the regulation rather than the presence of it in the first place. A deregulated world is scary to me.”
If you believe a deregulated world is better then you should be pleased with the progress made by engineers and managers like those at Boeing involved with the 737 who disrupted and circumvented the regulatory state for airplanes.
- imgabe 6y agoThere are more choices than "no regulations" and "every regulation". Regulations created to address proven problems are one thing. Creating a new regulation because somebody dreamed up a theoretical scenario is a different thing. Progress involves risk. Cowering and doing nothing because someone, somewhere might possibly be harmed is as bad as having no regulation, if not worse. We wouldn't have airplanes at all if someone were running after the Wright brothers telling them it's not safe. How does "Maybe we don't need 800 bazillion regulations that make it impossible to do anything" get translated to "Oh, so you want a wild west cowboy world where everyone does whatever they want and there are no regulations at all?" Try and have at least a little bit of nuance. Neither I nor TFA are arguing to abolish all regulations. Just recognize that regulation has a cost. It's not an unalloyed good. When speed matters, like getting a vaccine to end a global pandemic, that cost is measured in lives just as surely as the cost of a lack of regulation is.