Lets just say it: The 1% took all our fucking money! Deflation looms.

[Kulindahr]

Did you actually read the study you cite?

"The data for this study only goes through 2008."

What you are citing is the regulatory environment for small business in the USA under president George W. Bush.

Yep. And Obama continues to favor large corporations over small business -- another way of stifling job creation.

BTW, I'll note in passing that ben's reasoning in the bit you cited equates to arguing that because there are cats digging in the garden, no dogs do.

 

[Kulindahr]

Setting the Record Straight: The Crain and Crain Report on Regulatory Costs (Center for Progressive Reform White Paper #1103; February 2011)

Fox's Attack On Regulations Relies On Widely Discredited Cost Estimate (Media Matters; September 2011)




It is appropriate that you provided a link to the disclaimer statement by SBA, rather than a direct link to the Crain and Crain report itself.

Regulations May Not Really Cost $1.75 Trillion a Year, SBA Office Concedes (Government Executive; October 2014)

In other words, that "report" is a joke.

I want to illustrate just one point: that regulations often have the benefit of increased productivity. When my sister worked as an engineer at Oregon Chain, she undertook a study of the production floor and came up with a number of changes to how things were done, with the result that productivity jumped while worker accidents and injuries declined. Later, a state legislator wanted the changes to be written into regulations for industry. The significance here is that Oregon Chain actually opposed having that done, for the simple reason that it would have had the result of making their competition more competitive with them.

OTOH, regulations do make it harder to start a business. I know guys who started their own businesses back in the 80s who would not be able to duplicate those starts today because regulations have substantially limited the avenues available for starting up a business as well as making starting one significantly more expensive. For that matter, I wouldn't bother trying to start a handyman business now, because regulations imposed since I originally did have made starting up sufficiently more costly that I would almost certainly go three or four years before getting close to running in the black, as opposed to the less than one year it originally took.

 

[Kulindahr]

I suppose "picking nits" is the new code word for "I'm not going to let petty things like facts and reality get in the way of my talking points."

To skip picking nits and go to the core: the issue is not regulation, but how lawyers have forced the government to write them, namely in "one size fits all" ways that eliminate the exercise of judgment and shut out legitimate and effective ways to do things. The problem is that our regulations are anally retentive instead of flexible. Effective regulations state principles, they don't give detailed prescriptions and/or checklists.

 

[Kulindahr]

Damned time limit on editing consigned my edit to oblivion.....

I tried to post that federal wetland regulations remain my favorite example of this sort of problem, because they apply one definition to all locations in all fifty states, which anyone who has taken any basic ecological geography studies knows is akin to requiring all new first grade students to be the same height and weight.

And a new example of this has come to my attention: rules for handling runoff from livestock fields actually result in the destruction of wetlands, because the rules are so inflexible that in some cases not only is diluted excrement kept from the alleged wetland, but so are normal nutrients that feed the wetland, resulting in a stagnant, toxic morass instead of a healthy marsh. In place of wet areas with trees and brush growing here and there, what is produced is an area of standing water with dead trees and bushes poking out, a mess that supports no wildlife and makes no contribution to a healthy environment.

 

[frankfrank]

I suppose "picking nits" is the new code word for "I'm not going to let petty things like facts and reality get in the way of my talking points."

Or it means that somebody has crabs, LOL.

 

[evanrick]

regulation has increased.

facts please or is it just another one of your lies?

 

[evanrick]

Whats sad about Mitt Romney and his 1% friends is that Barack Obama pays closer to a 47% tax rate than Romney does even though Romney is worth hundreds of millions more. Only in America would Mitt Romney think he would make a good president.

 

[Kyanimal]

http://www.youtube.com/v/4FrGxO2Fn_M

Pass it on!

 

[Kulindahr]

facts please or is it just another one of your lies?

As long as there are lawyers and bureaucrats, regulation is going to increase. Personally I think that Congress assigning legislative authority to the executive branch by handing out its authority to write regulations is a travesty, because that's the real source of ever-expanding regulation -- bureaucrats and lawyers inventing new and more detailed regulations to both justify their own jobs and provide income via the courts.

When the Constitution said that all legislative authority was vested in Congress, it meant that only Congress was allowed to exercise legislative authority; it wasn't supposed to get farmed out or handed over to the executive branch.

 

[Kulindahr]

http://www.youtube.com/v/4FrGxO2Fn_M

Pass it on!

A five percent difference in spending would mean a million new American jobs?

I'm on it!

Though I think I'll start with yard sales.....

 

[Benvolio]

As long as there are lawyers and bureaucrats, regulation is going to increase. Personally I think that Congress assigning legislative authority to the executive branch by handing out its authority to write regulations is a travesty, because that's the real source of ever-expanding regulation -- bureaucrats and lawyers inventing new and more detailed regulations to both justify their own jobs and provide income via the courts.

When the Constitution said that all legislative authority was vested in Congress, it meant that only Congress was allowed to exercise legislative authority; it wasn't supposed to get farmed out or handed over to the executive branch.

I absolutely agree. Our democracy is taken from us to the extent that laws are made by non-elected bureaucrats. And often, local governments and school boards are given money on condition that they conform to regulations by the federal agency, depriving the people of democracy on the local level. In effect, the federal government buys democracy away from the local governments. The Constitution gives the Federal Government no authority over education, but by giving money to the school boards on condition of obedience, it buys power that the Constitution and people denied it.