The Contradiction Of Opposing Regulation

Some challenge that the most efficient regulator is free-market competition among those seeking to attract the buying public. They argue that government regulation is intrusive with the marketplace and works to the disadvantage of both consumers and producers. Advocates of government regulation, however, see a better need to observe and guide the path of competition. They believe that an entirely unrestrained market will unavoidably lead to monopolistic practices, higher costs, underserved segments of society, and lower-quality goods and

The United States has experienced fundamental changes that are dramatically detrimental to democracy. Voters’ ability to define political discourse has been so diminished that even decisive election results like Barack Obama’s in 2012 have little impact. That’s because powerful interests — freed to, in effect, buy elections, unhindered by downsized and diffused media that must rely on revenue from campaign ads — now set the rules of engagement. Lobbying involves working to bring pressure to bear on policy makers to gain favorable policy outcomes. In order to accomplish their goals, interest groups develop a strategy or plan of action and execute it through specific tactics. The particular strategies developed and the specific tactics used, however, vary widely both among and within political

Even though the federal government is the main source of promotion and regulation of industry in America, regulation almost inescapably obstructs success

Many controversial topics have surfaced recently, but one that tends to fly under the radar is lobbying. Lobbying is defined as a group of persons who work or conduct a campaign to influence members of a legislature to vote according to a group’s special interests (“Lobby”). Although average citizens are not fully aware of the issue, it is quite contentious in politics. For those who are against it, they believe that restrictions should be placed on lobbying because it distorts democracy. Lobbyists use money and cost-effective strategies to sway the opinions of lawmakers. Others see lobbyists as effective, political tour guides who help pass legislation. An analysis of the lobbying process reveals the outcomes are often

In America, the debate over the warranted degree of government involvement in one’s daily life is ever-present. As citizens, Americans demand protection and security from our leaders. In return, they provide capital, ingenuity, and a responsibility to society. As can especially be seen in the current time of recession and bailouts, citizens rely on the government to regulate and stabilize of our economy - to act on behalf of their wellbeing. However, this has not always been the case. Subsequent to western expansion, the government was hesitant to impose regulations upon its citizens, especially in relation to their economic pursuits. Political leaders relied on powerful businessmen’s’ support for occupational security - so formed the

The public interest theory of regulation, or economic theory of regulation states that industrial regulation is essential in maintaining a natural monopoly. Natural monopolies turning into a regular monopoly charging monopoly prices can be harmful to society. Something that everyone most generally uses or needs like public resources i.e. electricity and water. Almost every person in our society requires these resources. The initial cost for creating a firm that can provide these services is high. Some startup cost can include power stations as well as power lines, labor costs, the cost of producing the power, and many other costs. These naturally occurring costs can often bar entry or discourage entry into the industry. In the event that a firm does make it into the industry and starts producing these public resources such as

This idea was explored further in Atlas Shrugged, where individuals like Dagny and Hank were forced to abandon their ambitions and needs in lieu of whatever the majority in power, the government, dictated. Their industries were restricted and nationalized by political leaders who argued their sacrifice was for the good of the “big family” (Rand, Atlas Shrugged 608), but like in Soviet Russia, the only ones who benefited were the leaders themselves. Consider the “anti-dog-eat-dog rule” (Rand, Atlas Shrugged, 77), which limited the expansion of railroad companies and the start-ups of new companies; such regulations and antitrust laws symptomatic of socialism rob individuals of their rights to support and run businesses (Rand, “What is Capitalism?”), Rand explained, despite their claim to help consumers and business owners.

America land of the free and home of the brave or at least that’s what we’re raised to think. The suppression of civil liberties has lingered amongst us since the birth of this nation. To resolve this problem, the federal government is known to introduce legislation in order to balance equality in society. Since companies are bound to the law of the land, they must comply with all rules and regulations but often, largely successful companies will go above and beyond meeting the standard by listening to public opinion. It is often a choice for companies however, to decide which is the best opinion to follow. As a nation we once were in full swing in support of civil liberties but in light of recent events, (such as the

If we were to govern the greed, this would keep over ambitious bankers and people on Wall Street from going too far and forcing them to follow astute regulations. Greed hasn’t been the only component in getting us all this way. It has been a slow but long process of changes and removal of certain restrictions over time. For instance, pharmaceutical companies were never allowed to advertise before; now you can’t turn on a television or read a magazine without reading an ad for a certain drug on the market. It’s the markets who have overstepped and have entered into our lives usually directed by nonmarket measures. Markets are no longer only there to benefit the good of the public. The ante has been raised and these market values are now being pushed into our everyday lives.

This also means that our political leaders that should be concerned about the effects of regulation. In my opinion, there advantages and disadvantages to regulation. The advantages are the Government should be regulating certain things to make life safer and to make America stronger, and better place to live. The disadvantages are, the government should be regulating with more common sense. What I'm saying is the government should consider the costs and the benefits of what they're regulating. Unfortunately, if the Government does not, Americans run the risk of some kind of regulation that can't be explained by anyone except a bunch of lawyers which is going to cost the taxpayers more

Recent proposed legislation (H.R. 2887), titled the No Regulation Without Representation Act of 2017, seeks to codify the “physical presence” standard for sales tax nexus. The bill attempts to prevent states from imposing sales tax collection on sellers beyond their respective jurisdictions. The physical presence standard, infamously established by the U.S. Supreme Court case Quill Corp. vs. North Dakota 25 years ago, has not been widely adopted by states; only 10 states maintain this standard . Most states have adopted an “economic presence” standard to better capture the commerce being conducted within their jurisdictions. Twenty-five years ago, when Quill was established, consumer use of the internet was nowhere near the level of

Another key question is why do we have regulation? Regulation is meant to serve the best interest of the public. Regulation can serve the private interest, public interest or both. Almost every aspect of our daily life is regulated (as per Regulation: A Primer, page 1). Regulation is very comprehensive to the point that it extends to the moment we wake up to the moment we go back to bed at night. In the morning, there are regulations that dictate which airwaves are used by your radio station; in addition, food and drug agencies regulate the content of your toothpaste, soap,

Greed alone is not sufficient for policy failure, since the question then is why the people do not organize to counter the influence of the greedy interests and power seekers. The answer is the apathy of the voters. With the benefits concentrated among a few interests, and the costs spread among the whole population, the incentives of the greedy dominate the incentives of the masses. For the average voter, the cost of organizing and lobbying is greater than his own benefit, since the benefit goes to everybody.

* Is it acceptable for corporations to use their considerable power tp shape government policy?

When looking at corrupted services such as fast food eateries that serve items genetically modified packed with countless calories, or the trends of wastefulness allowing higher gas emissions to pollute the earth, and even misleading advertising from cigarette ads aimed to target children, a sense of helplessness occurs. Helpless because the laws that govern the well being of the people are neglected . Subsequently, this feeling is followed by a question of whose exact job is it to look after the wellbeing of the citizens? Is it the government? They do allow corporations to serve unhealthy products like fast food; even with their current health codes to prevent such. Even their policies to solve waste problems have created bigger thrash issues. With these just being some of the basic services they govern, they do seem to play a role in everyday life. With this in mind, we need a reminder that the government does provide the political framework for our country to run normally because of laws made in town to the policies handled in Washington that control the flow of our everyday lives. This is the reason we do look for to them for our answers. A new question that can help answer the one previously posed arises. Who is intended to run the government if the laws they enact to protect our well being aren’t working? This question can easily be answered when we look at whose job it is to get the politicians who run the government into office. It