(March 31, 2011 at 2:28 pm)Ashendant Wrote:(March 31, 2011 at 2:04 pm)theVOID Wrote: None of you seem to get the difference between regulation and policing.
Enlighten us, oh wise one
Policing is investigating and prosecuting crimes - Given good evidence to believe foul play will occur or that it has, policing will investigate breaches of the law and prosecute offenders. This encompasses use of force, fraud, coercion and negligence. If a company builds a product that is unsafe or has risks in use and does not fully disclose those details then they have committed both fraud and neglected their responsibilities and should be prosecuted thoroughly.
Regulation is many things:
1. Pre-crime: this is equivalent to checking up on people for the simple reason that they could do wrong or that something may go wrong at some point in the future - These actions have no consideration for the intent to commit crime OR some existent violation of the law. This is something that if was done in personal lives would cause outrage - If some government official was going to force you to take steps to prevent your ability to do something wrong because someone else has done something wrong given similar opportunity people would be furious - You would have to face expenses because someone thinks you might do wrong some time in the future because someone else did. Some frankly bizarre double standard convinces people that it is okay to do it professional lives. The worst part about this is the cost of compliance also effects the small to medium sized businesses who are the cornerstone of the economy, the businesses who are unlikely to do any wrong to begin with are forced to comply with stupid costs because somewhere down the line some other company might to something unethical - The costs come straight out of their capital investments, making it more expensive to run and expand their businesses which means that existing employees get paid less and new ones are less likely to be hired - It's completely fucking stupid.
2. "Protectionism" - This is when the government dictates the terms of agreements between consenting parties, setting various minimums and maximums on various issues, a minimum wage and holiday leave would be an example of this. Some form of protectionism is the only form of regulation that I would advocate, if only to protect the naive, however some of the "protections" such as the new "disability" laws that I linked to in the audio clip above, are absolutely detrimental to their stated goals and cause more problems than good. Protectionism needs to be absolutely thorough in it's planning and implementation, not hastily and foolishly scrapped together - It can be a massive detriment to the economy.
3. Market manipulation - This is what I absolutely despise - This is when the government tries to be the masters of the economy, allocating resources, taxpayer money, subsidies, tax breaks and imposing tariffs to move the economy, OUR production, in the direction that they see fit, often straight into the pockets of corporations. This is, in my opinion, an absolute violation of the rights of the people to chose how to spend their own productivity - Not to mention that is it plainly stupid to think that the government can allocate productivity better than the entire collective population - It is both immoral and stupid. Market manipulation caused the latest recession, by guaranteeing loans in order to create a housing boom they took the liabilities away from lenders, instead of people making loans having a vested interest in making sure they can be repaid they did not have to care because the government would pay it. Instead of needing sound loans they simply signed up as many sub prime loans as possible and sold them on directly to Fanny and Freddy. It's Keynesian nonsense.
There are more aspects, but those are the main 3.
.
