Hacker News Reader

Comment by loki49152 | Hacker News Reader

Lobbying is a form of self-defense against the real corruption - a government that has assigned itself the power to interfere in our day-to-day lives. Most people today take it for granted that "regulations" must exist because they solve some actual problem.

Usually, the "problem" they exist to solve is that some government functionary wants to look like they're "doing something", which is itself a form of corruption. Regulations also commonly serve ideologically-motivated belief that some faction has managed to force on everyone else. Everything else that is "corrupt" about proscriptive regulations follows from the fact that the belief in proscriptive regulations is a corrupt belief (and illegal under the US Constitution as it was actually written).

View on HN

Like child-labor laws? Public education? Your comment has a point, but it is quite black and white.

Governments are a service that people buy, which we have collectively voted on, agreeing that there are things that a purely corporation driven society would not do.

Just for clarity, it seems that when you say regulations, you're really talking about laws.

Specifically of the Administrative form (read: delegated to the executive in their definition by Congress)

These are the types of regulations that can change on a moments notice, and that the American citizen has no knob to turn to influence once the paper to establish the Agency in question is inked.

Executive lawmaking was never supposed to be a thing.

While I share your concern with the legislative branch handing over its lawmaking authority to the executive branch, the rules really don't change on a moment's notice. There is a defined rule making process which all federal agencies must follow, which includes a significant public comment period. The real problem is that regular people don't have time to monitor notices of proposed rule making or submit comments in the right way. So the process ends up being dominated by lobbyists, special interest groups, and unaccountable bureaucrats who are pushing their own agendas.

> Usually, the "problem" they exist to solve is that some government functionary wants to look like they're "doing something",

I tend to disagree. Most regulations address some problem, and in fact, the rules around changing regulations are strict enough that most of Trump's appointees' attempts to do away with regulations were ultimately reversed by the courts.

Sometimes, the problem no longer applies. But, I don't just want to disagree. So I'll tell you what. Throw 3 or 4 regulations out there you think are insane, and we'll see if I can explain a real problem for at least 1. I'd bet I could with a single regulation chosen at random, but your choices will be anything but random.

> serve ideologically-motivated belief that some faction has managed to force on everyone else

This one is true. Like, I believe murder is wrong and want it to be outlawed. But there are tons of other beliefs - e.g. rich people should a higher percentage of their income - that are ideological as well as pragmatic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com