Whew. Now that he’s gone I don’t have to do this to his face.

You are, of course, exactly right, and when I read the title to your post I felt a reaction. A couple of points.

In my limited defense, and TBs’ too, when faced with his extreme statements I respond “Yah, but – - – ” and reply just as extremely. That drags on for a while. That’s a knee-jerk reaction, and what thought goes into the matter is not about the subject but about how to reply.

Second, you’ve reminded me of what I sometimes seek but haven’t figured out how to do as yet. That’s how to make sense out of what he says, how to find a basic premise which has some validity. As you point out, there is one, he’s not an idiot. He may come across as a stooge for greedy folks, but no more so than I do for liberal causes.

There is a basic difference in values. That’s fundamental and it’s classic. His view on the rights of property are countered by mine of the rights of people. To my mind he’s not a very good advocate for his, and to his I fail mine. And we’re both correct, because as you say reality lays in the middle. Undisturbed, by the way, by either of us.

Another mistake we both make is to try to “win” rather than resolve viewpoints on an issue. I will try from time to time to get us to stay with the topic, but I believe TB brings a street-fight into a debate, he thinks a street-fight IS a debate. To my discredit, I do too sometimes, and yet I believe I have an option not available to him. I can debate.

Bottom line – you are correct, and I shall try harder to see the truth in what he says. A problem is that when greed is the only reality, the only driving force I can acknowledge that but not respect it. I’ll have to see how I can work that out.

Arf

Regulation is instigated to solve a very real problem, usually dangerous or unfair practices by business. But it also has a tendency to stick around longer than it needs to, fails to adapt to the times, and develops a life of its own, usually because it generates constituencies
(in both government and business) to prolong it or make it worse.

The solution is to neither eliminate it, or increase it, but to review it periodically and bring it up to date. Unfortunately, as you point out, powerful interests usually adapt to regulation in ways that are very profitable, and they lobby vigorously against reform, or lobby vigorously for abandoning all regulation altogether. It is very cynical to single out an example of poor, ineffective, or even unjust regulation and use it as an excuse to eliminate all regulation altogether and essentially, let businessmen do whatever they damn well please.

These interests are neither fully governmental, as TB implies, or totally private, as you do. They are a combination of the two, not because they are conspiring together in seedy backroom deals, but because they are both following their own careerist path of least resistance.

After all, everybody agrees the tax laws are ridiculous, but there are those who get rich off their loophole, and others, like lobbyists, accountants and lawyers, who get rich off the complexity itself.

The Libertarians tell us the way to do this is to break up the cozy relationship between business and the bureaucracy. What they never tell you is just how they’re going to do that. Crony Capitalism is usually fully justified on constitutional, legal, and today, ideological grounds; the politicians on their payroll have seen to that.

As the society becomes more complex, the amount of inefficiency and friction increases. Like all complex systems, the more complex they are, the more a proportion of their resources must be devoted to maintenance. Bad law and regulation is part of the price we pay for the good law and regulation we enjoy that makes modern life tolerable.

It’s like organized crime. All democracies have gangsters, because the only way you can fully defeat the mob is with violent countermeasures. The criminals will take advantage of the the law and democratic procedure to protect themselves. Without civil and constitutional safeguards, it is easy to crush organized crime, when you add law, courts and freedom, they slip through the cracks. Its a lot harder to fight crime when you actually have to prove it in court, and if you have to do that, some criminals will get away with it. Its part of the price we pay for freedom.

Much of it is instigated by management and realistically cannot be removed without their agreement. It is not just a matter of the goddamned bureaucrats and/or liberals.

Remember what Calvin Coolidge said – “The business of the United States is business.”

And of course, the legitimate needs of business for a more streamlined and just regulatory environment should never be used as an excuse to let business abuse the consumer, the worker, the environment or public safety and health.

Unfortunately, people today are more concerned with finding a job, feeding their families, and saving their homes than with alleged inconveniences to entrepreneurs. And as you point out, the really big businesses already have all the work-arounds to red tape they need in place.

Page One: Large letters –

A Mind Is A Terrible Thing To Waste

Page Two: Smiling Reagan Picture

- – - Money On.

Very often entrepreneurs, erstwhile businessmen and women all, champions of capitalism and advocates of competition, are the folks who are demanding stricter regulations, higher fees and bigger bonds.

Y’see, they don’t want to make it easy for others to get into the business, whatever it is. I’m most familiar with construction, where I’ve seen it over and over and over. Your basic capitalist wants higher educational requirements and higher bonds most of the time, more expensive licensing, stricter licenses, all for the primary purpose of limiting competition.

There’s a bit more to this story than simply whipping big government for stifling capitalism, big government shutting down the little guy. In fact, there’s a lot more to these stories that doesn’t fit an anecdotal “ain’t it awful the government is so big, so powerful, and so hell-bent on destroying all that is good”. Governments are basically run by business, and only regulated in the most egregious matters.