Government should NEVER be involved in business regulation, because
everything government touches turns to shit. And by "shit" I mean "corruption, malfeasance, and other dangers to human health, wealth, and happiness."
Regulation belongs in the private sector, with competition available and with strict enforcement of anti-fraud laws or rules, including personal liability for the PEOPLE involved in causing harm.
Non-government regulation is nothing new, and it works FAR better than anything government supplies.
For instance, Underwriter Labs and MET: Founded in 1894 to regulate electrical devices, UL predates OSHA by 76 years. Today, OSHA relies heavily on standards created by UL and on UL testing, on standards created by ANSI, and on other private, non-government groups. MET is a competitor formed in 1959. Both have expanded their domains over the years and have also become increasingly entangled with government agencies, but remain private, for-profit companies.
For an eye-opening look at how civil society -- that is, a society without structures that initiate coercion for funding or anything else -- can improve on what we now call "government", consider The Market for Liberty by Morris and Linda Tannehill.
The arguments against freeing ourselves from coercive governance (and the attendant corruption, war, taxation, injustice, etc) are much the same as those used against the abolition of chattel slavery in the early 1800s. In other words, the arguments against eliminating our enslavement to the State are bullshit.
Government should NEVER be involved in business regulation, because everything government touches turns to shit. And by "shit" I mean "corruption, malfeasance, and other dangers to human health, wealth, and happiness."
Regulation belongs in the private sector, with competition available and with strict enforcement of anti-fraud laws or rules, including personal liability for the PEOPLE involved in causing harm.
Cue the downvotes . . .
How do you regulate the private sector without government intervention? Isn't that a contradiction?
Non-government regulation is nothing new, and it works FAR better than anything government supplies.
For instance, Underwriter Labs and MET: Founded in 1894 to regulate electrical devices, UL predates OSHA by 76 years. Today, OSHA relies heavily on standards created by UL and on UL testing, on standards created by ANSI, and on other private, non-government groups. MET is a competitor formed in 1959. Both have expanded their domains over the years and have also become increasingly entangled with government agencies, but remain private, for-profit companies.
For an eye-opening look at how civil society -- that is, a society without structures that initiate coercion for funding or anything else -- can improve on what we now call "government", consider The Market for Liberty by Morris and Linda Tannehill.
https://mises.org/library/market-liberty-1 -- free PDF download of entire book
or https://www.amazon.com/Market-Liberty-Morris-Tannehill-ebook/dp/B007N7JDLA/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1696794571&sr=8-1 (Kindle version is $3.50)
The arguments against freeing ourselves from coercive governance (and the attendant corruption, war, taxation, injustice, etc) are much the same as those used against the abolition of chattel slavery in the early 1800s. In other words, the arguments against eliminating our enslavement to the State are bullshit.
Thanks, I'll take a look!