Holy false dichotomies Batman! “Talking” and “doing” are not zero sum: good results generally involve talking about what to do, doing it, talking about how it

Holy false dichotomies Batman! “Talking” and “doing” are not zero sum: good results generally involve talking about what to do, doing it, talking about how it went and what to change, and trying the new thing in a virtuous iterative cycle. Regulation is not a scalar: regulation preventing municipal fiber is good for cable companies, bad for municipalities. Regulation mandating bathroom breaks is good for warehouse workers, bad for bond villains, erm, titans of industry. Regulation preventing nuclear power plants is good for fossil fuel companies, bad for carbon emissions (and Ukrainians apparently, somewhat shocking). Regulation preventing new houses is good for the asset class and bad for the working class. “Regulation” is a lot of things, pretty much the only constant is that there will be winners, losers, intended consequences, and unintended consequences like any mechanism design change. I think the author might be a little skittish about saying what he means: I want the regulatory regime to continue to favor people like me and my role models, in fact I’d like more of that please. Here’s an argument for how that could benefit others enough to get you dear reader, on board with it.