26 ms·
I certainly don't dispute that the federal government is vulnerable to regulatory capture by rent-seekers. But if you imagine that state- and local governments
by dctoedt 4y ago
I certainly don't dispute that the federal government is vulnerable to regulatory capture by rent-seekers. But if you imagine that state- and local governments are any different, you must live in a laudably-different place than do most of us.
- phpisthebest 4y agoI dont imagine them to be different, I imagine 1. A Single vote in a smaller political division carries more weight than being diluted in a large nation like the US at the national level. 2. If the local rent seeking becomes too harmful it is far less costly to relocate to a new City, County, or State than it is to immigrate to a new nation 3. It is infinitely more costly for a large corporation to rent seek thousands of cities / counts, and/or 50 US States, than it is for them to rent seek 1 federal government. I could add probably 5 more things. IMO Federalism is a more desirable system of governance, and provides ways to limit the damage the inevitable corruption can cause.
- jen20 4y agoIt’s clearly not infinitely more costly. There aren’t infinite states. I doubt it’s even 50 times more costly.
- IG_Semmelweiss 4y agoAn elephant falling the proportion of twice his own height will probably die. A mouse falling the same proportional height will survive without a scratch. Systems behave differently depending on the scale. Small is beautiful, and its a good heuristic that the smaller the scale the more tolerance to variance that system has. A few local govts that have been captured (SF? NYC?) will not collapse the US.. But if the FBI, the executive, legislative get captured...