Tuesday, February 08, 2011

Critique of the Compulsive Need To Regulate

In the summer of 2008, the financial markets collapsed. Shortly after we learned that the former President of Nasdaq Bernie Madoff had been running a ponzi scheme, bilking millions out of investors, this was followed by news of poisonous substances being introduced in Chinese baby formula. What is common to all these cases is a lack of oversight and regulation. Max Border in his video was critical that his bbq sauce was not allowed to be sold. He never told us what he puts in it, but lets say he grates a cashew nut, or he adds some MSG, then sells it because the regulations have all been removed. Later that night barely able to breath children are in the emergency ward. Max forgot that some people are allergic to nuts, to MSG, but there were no regulations requiring him to label what the ingredients were and Max had his money, the children parents had the grief and worry. The reason for regulations is to remind parties that their interests, in Max's case to make money involve consideration of other people interests, in this case allergies. As companies become bigger and more powerful the need for regulation should grow commensurate with it. Had the regulations not been stripped away by the Clinton administration under lobbying from Wall Street, had the SEC enforced their own regulations instead of turning a blind eye to the President of Nasdaq neither would have occured. Both are failures to regulate power.
The framers of the Constitution understood this, the Bill of Rights was designed as a way to regulate the power of the Federal government, the wording tells the Government what it cannot do. So why should not the citizens of the US be protected from the awesome power of corporate greed and vested interests. Why should their not be regulation?

Max views the burden of regulation as a form of tax, his argument reminds me of my son asking why he had to do homework at school. Just like homework, regulations are a form of discipline, you do homework, like you observe regulations, because they are part of good work practise. A good company is not one that just makes money, after all drug dealers make money, so do sex traffickers, so do people winning the lottery. A good company is one that improves the community and society in general. When a company moves to a location it gains certain benefits, there are roads, places to park, their employees have schools they can send their children to for free, there are parks to relax in and much more, all made available to the company. They are in a sense a guest, and as a guest they have to respect the wishes of their hosts. I lived in Cross River, New York, there was a regulation that business signs could be no more than 12 inches high and of a certain type. The town council in discussion with the community agreed on the low stated appeal of the signs, it went with the general feel of the town. I approved too, I also approved of the regulation on not building near the watershed, the Croton Falls Reservoir fed New York City, because of those regulations New York does not have to treat its water.
When I examine the arguments put forward by Max, they come down to the only thing that matters is making money. We all saw in 2008 where that argument leads.