PDA

View Full Version : Economics is Fun, Part 18: Regulation



Chris
03-29-2012, 12:54 PM
Regulatory cost, planning and capture is discussed.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N3TbXM5AUE&list=PL06A6035D1EAF3D0E&index=18&feature=plpp_video

Conley
03-29-2012, 04:09 PM
Government should always err on the side of less regulation rather than more. Excellent point that even if the politicians consult with businesses prior to enacting those regulations, existing companies will deliberately make it more difficult for outside competitors. Regulatory capture.

Peter1469
03-29-2012, 04:20 PM
Government should have sensible regulation designed to protect the public without making ridiculous requirements on business. And regulators should do their job. After the S&L scandal the regulators investigated and sent cases off for prosecution. Over 1000 major cases led to jailed bankers.

After the current crisis we have seen very few prosecutions, and most of those were not related to the crash. Just typical fraud.

Chris
03-31-2012, 06:25 PM
Agree, I think, the only legitimate purpose of government is to protect rights: "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men."

MMC
03-31-2012, 06:41 PM
I can understand on having light regulation. But shouldn't there be more to an area such as the FDA? Who needs to keep Food and Drugs safe for the American people. Shouldn't this be a National Security Interest when we are taking in these types of imports, as well as the creations of such in the US?

Peter1469
03-31-2012, 08:19 PM
I can understand on having light regulation. But shouldn't there be more to an area such as the FDA? Who needs to keep Food and Drugs safe for the American people. Shouldn't this be a National Security Interest when we are taking in these types of imports, as well as the creations of such in the US?

Libertarians would tell you that the market would sort it out; if a new drug killed people, we would eventually understand the cause and naturally remove the harmful drug from the market. Problem solved.....

MMC
03-31-2012, 09:04 PM
Libertarians would tell you that the market would sort it out; if a new drug killed people, we would eventually understand the cause and naturally remove the harmful drug from the market. Problem solved.....


I don't see why we wouldnt want emphasis placed on this area and it's impact on the people. Doesn't mean we have to have more Heavy Regulation in ALL other areas. Would it?

Peter1469
03-31-2012, 09:08 PM
I don't see why we wouldnt want emphasis placed on this area and it's impact on the people. Doesn't mean we have to have more Heavy Regulation in ALL other areas. Would it?

Of course. This is an example of intelligent regulation. We just have to make sure that the regulators are not corrupted by the businesses they are looking at.

MMC
03-31-2012, 09:23 PM
Of course. This is an example of intelligent regulation. We just have to make sure that the regulators are not corrupted by the businesses they are looking at.


Seems the FDA should be split then. What do you think ?

Chris
03-31-2012, 11:32 PM
Libertarians would tell you that the market would sort it out; if a new drug killed people, we would eventually understand the cause and naturally remove the harmful drug from the market. Problem solved.....

No, pharmaceuticals, if they wanted to stay in business and profit, would conduct their own testing. Out of this would arise private testing companies with reputations on the line.

The government doesn't guarantee defect free drugs. It favors some pharmas over others for political reasons. And people are dying waiting for the FDA to approve drugs.

Chris
03-31-2012, 11:33 PM
I don't see why we wouldnt want emphasis placed on this area and it's impact on the people. Doesn't mean we have to have more Heavy Regulation in ALL other areas. Would it?

Seems to me that's the same argument in every area. Drugs, food, health, transportation, communication, the list is endless.

MMC
03-31-2012, 11:41 PM
Seems to me that's the same argument in every area. Drugs, food, health, transportation, communication, the list is endless.


Maybe I am slow tonight But I dont see why transportation would require as much as the FDA. As Security is part of that. But I do understand what you mean with a endlist list.

Peter1469
03-31-2012, 11:47 PM
Seems the FDA should be split then. What do you think ?

I have advocated that for years. The FDA is currently funded by user fees- those users are the companies trying to get patents. The FDA needs to be split into a regulatory agency and a an advocacy agency.

Peter1469
03-31-2012, 11:50 PM
No, pharmaceuticals, if they wanted to stay in business and profit, would conduct their own testing. Out of this would arise private testing companies with reputations on the line.

The government doesn't guarantee defect free drugs. It favors some pharmas over others for political reasons. And people are dying waiting for the FDA to approve drugs.

I agree that the government drug approval process it too long. But from looking at the recent drugs I would say people are better off with alternative medicine. The list of side effects for most modern drugs is staggering. And deadly.

MMC
03-31-2012, 11:52 PM
I agree that the government drug approval process it too long. But from looking at the recent drugs I would say people are better off with alternative medicine. The list of side effects for most modern drugs is staggering. And deadly.

Agreed there.....plus we are becoming less immune to the antibiotics they are making.

Peter1469
03-31-2012, 11:56 PM
Absolutely. And the factory farms over use antibiotics to keep the unhealthy animals alive. And people eat that garbage.

MMC
04-01-2012, 12:21 AM
I don't see how these two parties cannot see that there is much to fix, especially with Drugs and Food.

I won Custody of my kids thru a medical issue with drugs. Took me going to the FDA and getting paperwork on that drug Abilify. Which my ex had my oldest put on that drug and he was only like 12 years old. After i lost my buisness and went into debt with 40 grand in attorneys fees. I got tired of them threatening to withdraw if they didnt get any money.

The last one I shitcan right there in the court. As I was put thru the ringer in a post decree case running 9and half years in the garbage division of the legal system. I ended up getting the law books I needed for family law and then proceeded with on my pro bono. As soon as I did all the games stopped with her attorneys immediately. Then i began making the ground up for all that they had put me thru.

In the end I would force a judge to dismiss my petition aganist a Public guardian ad litem. As I had the evidence and proof she was incompetant and not protecting my sons. So I filed for For Officical Misconduct. Which if they would have let the case go and she lost. not only would she have lost her license as an attorney. But her job with the Public guardians office. I would discredit the states social worker and prove she was a flake. Which other real attorneys jumped all over and got her out of Forensics that the court used. Force a an Apology from a Judge. Then cause my ex to capitulate once I ran in with the paperwork from the FDA on the drug Abilify. It was either that or lose custody and get taken to court for criminal charges of Munchausen by Proxy.

In the end I won Custody but she did mess my kids up with all the meds she had them on. Costed me a 75k Janitorial Service. Major accounts. Time from my kids and War she could never win.

Stoney
04-01-2012, 06:27 AM
I think its natural to expect that we can put more policemen in the world and prevent what we consider to be unethical or unlawful events. But that expectation is dependent on those policemen finding and prosecuting the crimes before they happen. The recent history of the regulatory system suggests that doesn't happen. In the BP Oil Spill we learned that there were hundreds of regulatory infractions found that did not result in prevention (and a law that limited their liability.) After the most recent mine accident we learned the same. Maybe I remember within the last couple of years a lettuce producer found to be the source of unsanitary handling with a similar record of infractions, and no prevention. Admittedly these are but a few examples, not designed to prove the point, but to bring attention to the problem. And MMC's signature quote presents the problem;

"To destroy this invisible government, To dissolve this UNHOLY ALLIANCE between Corrupt Buisness and Corrupt Politics is the First task of the Statesmanship of the DAY" ~Theodore Roosevelt~ Steward of The People!

I might take issue with the term "corrupt." It might be taken to infer abnormal. But in fact the self interest of business to use the law and their ability to influence politicians through political contribution is not abnormal. And in fact we might agree that politicians spend much of their time seeking political contributions, by promising policy that favors the contributor.

After looking at this problem it seems to me that the goal of regulation can be accomplished through criminal and civil law, imperfectly. but what we do now is imperfect in its results, while perfectly allowing the "UNHOLY ALLIANCE."

MMC
04-01-2012, 06:40 AM
I think its natural to expect that we can put more policemen in the world and prevent what we consider to be unethical or unlawful events. But that expectation is dependent on those policemen finding and prosecuting the crimes before they happen. The recent history of the regulatory system suggests that doesn't happen. In the BP Oil Spill we learned that there were hundreds of regulatory infractions found that did not result in prevention (and a law that limited their liability.) After the most recent mine accident we learned the same. Maybe I remember within the last couple of years a lettuce producer found to be the source of unsanitary handling with a similar record of infractions, and no prevention. Admittedly these are but a few examples, not designed to prove the point, but to bring attention to the problem. And MMC's signature quote presents the problem;

"To destroy this invisible government, To dissolve this UNHOLY ALLIANCE between Corrupt Buisness and Corrupt Politics is the First task of the Statesmanship of the DAY" ~Theodore Roosevelt~ Steward of The People!

I might take issue with the term "corrupt." It might be taken to infer abnormal. But in fact the self interest of business to use the law and their ability to influence politicians through political contribution is not abnormal. And in fact we might agree that politicians spend much of their time seeking political contributions, by promising policy that favors the contributor.

After looking at this problem it seems to me that the goal of regulation can be accomplished through criminal and civil law, imperfectly. but what we do now is imperfect in its results, while perfectly allowing the "UNHOLY ALLIANCE."

T.Roosevelt made that statement in Wisconsin with a bullet in his chest, giving a speech for like an hour.

Stoney
04-01-2012, 07:27 PM
I hadn't seen the quote before and thought it fit nicely.

MMC
04-01-2012, 09:45 PM
I hadn't seen the quote before and thought it fit nicely.

I use to have an Eisenhower Quote.....but when I was going thru some studying with T.R. I thought that best applies to what we got going out there today.