One of the fundamental differences between the conservatives now in power and liberals is the belief in "unfettered capitalism". This leads to the big big push for "rolling back job killing regulations".
I'm sure there are many bothersome regulations, particularly those that are mostly "paperwork" that don't accomplish anything. That said, unfettered capitalism has a long history of working hard to maximize profits while ignoring the social cost of realizing those profits. More recently, instead of just ignoring the social costs, clever corporations get the government (us) to pay. Example: Walmart employs a lot of people at low wages with few benefits while earning pretty big profits. Workers often qualify for government programs that help make up the difference. Walmart keeps the profits, we pay the social costs.
This privatizing profits while socializing costs really comes to a head when we think about those "job killing, over reaching, environmental regulations" When a business, landowner, developer, etc. degrades the environment we all pay for it whether it is in health costs, increased costs for drinkable water, lost recreational opportunities, etc . But the "business" keeps all the profits for itself. What is the rationale that supports the enterprise not paying the true costs (controlling emissions, discharging only clean water, keeping sediment and chemicals from washing into waterways)?
Our modern American culture recognizes the many benefits of a vibrant, capitalist economy while
understanding that business costs are not limited to raw materials and workers pay but include the costs of making sure that the enterprise "does no harm", In most cases, environmental regulations are simply an attempt to get businesses to pay the true costs of production.
No comments:
Post a Comment