Hacker News Reader

Comment by lrem | Hacker News Reader

What good is regulation without solid enforcement?

This is what is happening.

Likewise with the messy spacex launch… regulation is happening in response.

That’s not the same thing at all. Fraud isn’t something that needs new regulation. The existing rules are fine, they need to be enforced.

We need new rules that improve enforcement. And then enforce the enforcement with rules about enforcing enforcement!1

That's the thinking of bureocrats who see the world in terms of rules and enforce, but fail to see the bigger picture that it's easier for everyone to just relax the rules.

That only works if you don’t have targeted defunding of regulatory bodies - that’s what a lot of these come down to in many countries now. People vote for laws that protect them, then anti-actual-person politicians vote to defund the agencies enforcing those regulations. It’s win win for them: they get to give their friends and employers tax cuts and lower operating costs (by socializing the downstream costs), and because the agencies are under funded they slow down which feeds into “these agencies are bad because they’re slow and inefficient, so we should end them completely”

Ding ding ding.

Capitalism is buyer, seller, and marketplace, with "enough" regulatory feedback to stabilize the system.

Regulation becomes a bugaboo when too many people make their living stomping on the brakes to keep everything tidy.

Regulation is a "Goldilocks" challenge.

Regulation is there to make sure you don't do things that damage society or hurt people. If someone stomps on you, you're probably doing things to damage society or hurt people. Stop doing that.

...unless and until it ventures into https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

That's less bad than no regulation.

But at the end of the day, both extremes are not helpful so we should be promoting regulatory balance not extremist positions.

Hence my original

> with "enough" regulatory feedback

that seemed to meet with disfavor.

Regulation is done, ideally, with the reality of the society in mind and up to date with the zeitgeist at all times. In practice there's a lot of room for improvement in this regard.

> Capitalism is buyer, seller, and marketplace with "enough" regulatory feedback to stabilize the system.

Capitalism is “a small elite possess the means of production”, what you are describing is “market economy”, those two concepts have been muddled by cold war propaganda but they aren't the same thing.

Crony capitalism, monopolies and regulatory captures are all features of Capitalism, but they work against the goals of a market economy.

I do not understand your post in the context of local vendors running a shop or restaurant of providing a service, but go on.

I thought we were talking about airlines and regulation but OK…

(also, given many of today's restaurant and shop are independent vs subsidiaries of global corporations, this argument is a little bit obsolete).

Same point as fake food in the restaurant.

I have to admit, I have no idea of what you're trying to say.

I hope that we can agree that the pattern of needing regulation to keep meat safe at the restaurant is congruent with needing to keep parts safe in the aircraft.

Also, the mods seem testy on this thread.

Sure. That doesn't change the confusion between Capitalism and Market Economy as orthogonal (or even antagonistic) concepts.

There is no confusion in the work of decent economists like Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell.

Rejecting their wisdom leads to the economic cratering we see about us.

You forgot the /s at the end I guess…

I am as serious as lung cancer. All of this Wokery and and MMT is so much Words Of Opposite Translation (WOOT).

A fantastic game is talked, but Emmanuel Goldstien always manages to tube things. Always...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com