Hacker News Reader

Comment by camillomiller | Hacker News Reader

you can try to reason with the people who post comments like the one you're responding to, but the truth is they are just there waiting for anything a regulator does to desparage it, defend corporate and capital, and change nothing about the status quo. The worst part is that they do it thinking they are so edgy for knowing exactly why just another piece of regulation will clearly not work. Funnily enough, the EU track record proves that, apart from some exceptions, these type of regulations work really well. USB-C. Data Roaming across all of Europe. Laws on single use plastics. Etc. But yeah, it's just another regulation! EU BAD!

View on HN

It’s a fair criticism, but note the Draghi report:

“The regulatory burden on European companies is high and continues to grow, but the EU lacks a common methodology to assess it. The Commission has been working for years to reduce the "stock" and "flow" of regulation under the Better Regulation agenda. However, this effort has had limited impact so far. The stock of regulation remains large and new regulation in the EU is growing faster than in other comparable economies. While direct comparisons are obscured by different political and legal systems, around 3,500 pieces of legislation were enacted and around 2,000 resolutions were passed in the US at the federal level over the past three Congress mandate: (2019-2024). During the same period, around 13,000 acts were passed by the EU. Despite this increasing flow of regulation, the EU lacks a quantitative framework to analyse the costs and benefits of new laws.”

That's a fair criticism, but a far cry from the blanket anti-regulation reaction that we get from some people here.

> pieces of legislation were enacted and around 2,000 resolutions

I'm wondering if this includes regulatory agencies which in the US operate under the executive

I would guess it's included but the wording (act, resolution) is very "legislative" coded

I agree with Draghi 100%, he’s a genius and I would love to see him take Von Der Leyen’s place. That said, the original comment has a very different intent.

> you can try to reason with the people who post comments like the one you're responding to, but the truth is they are just there waiting for anything a regulator does to desparage it, defend corporate and capital, and change nothing about the status quo. The worst part is that they do it thinking they are so edgy for knowing exactly why just another piece of regulation will clearly not work. Funnily enough, the EU track record proves that, apart from some exceptions, these type of regulations work really well. USB-C. Data Roaming across all of Europe. Laws on single use plastics. Etc. But yeah, it's just another regulation! EU BAD!

How about extending others some good faith?

These are political disagreements with decades (sometimes centuries) of history, and unless you're fifteen years old, there's a better explanation for the fact that others disagree with you than "I am the single smartest person in the universe, and all my political opinions are so irrefutably correct that anyone who disagrees must be doing so in bad faith and out of ignorance".

The vast majority of people want what's best for their societies, and have different views as to how best achieve that goal, that arise from diverse life experiences.

> The vast majority of people want what's best for their societies, and have different views as to how best achieve that goal, that arise from diverse life experiences.

I'd personally disagree with that assessment. I think the vast majority of people want what's best for them and the cohorts they're in. Which is quite different from wanting what's best for society as a whole.

> These are political disagreements with decades (sometimes centuries) of history, and unless you're fifteen years old, there's a better explanation for the fact that others disagree with you

The better explanation is that they have acquired their political tastes mindlessly and are now defending them in an equal manner. The presumption of good faith is wasted on them.

> The vast majority of people want what's best for their societies, and have different views as to how best achieve that goal, that arise from diverse life experiences.

That's incorrect. Just take a look at the housing situation in the US: what's best for society is to build, but a majority of the people (the current owners) are blocking that because it suits them.

> The presumption of good faith is wasted on them.

That's just assholery masquerading as enlightenment.

> That's incorrect. Just take a look at the housing situation in the US: what's best for society is to build, but a majority of the people (the current owners) are blocking that because it suits them.

Maybe if you call the majority stupid some more, that's famously convincing in a democracy. You'll definitely build sustainable coalitions for the policies you want this way.

Capital loves this kind of left wing politics. Off-putting and impotent.

Who did I call stupid (except for you personally ?). The current owners are not stupid, they're self-interested, hypocritical and parassitical.

And they love your style of politics for being profoundly unthreatening to them.

What politics ? We're talking on an irrelevant site here.

The comedic irony of your personal attack and smug dismissal isn't lost on me.

Let's try to stay focused on the subject matter and leave personal jabs aside.

No people were named. There was no personal attack.

LOL paranoia much? No idea who you are.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com