5 ms·

>(barring regulation that forces compromises to product efficacy) Can you really not think of any benefits of regulation to correct for pervasive market failur

• Filligree 5y ago
  Of course there are benefits. It’s still true that it compromises the main goal of the glue—compromise is the point.
  • minikites 5y ago
    That's not the typical framing I see, it's usually "government regulations strangling private sector innovation" with the implication that there are no benefits.
    • BurningFrog 5y ago
      I'd say the costs outweigh the benefits, and the benefits often go to the politically connected who can influence the regulations.
      • wolverine876 5y ago
        > the benefits often go to the politically connected who can influence the regulations The benefits go to a lot of people, or you could say that voting makes you politically connected. Politicians must balance many interests, including those of the politically connected and of the voting public. You don't want to be the politician who failed to protect your constituents.
        • deleted 5y ago
          [deleted]
  • wolverine876 5y ago
    > It’s still true that it compromises the main goal of the glue—compromise is the point. That may happen, but it's not generally true. Regulation can, for example, increase competition which increases innovation. It can standardize safety rules, which reduces the risk for manufacturers clearly defining what they do and don't have to do. Etc.