Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The deregulation movement was pushed / funded by people who would benefit from deregulation. If they thought the public would benefit, they wouldn’t have done it.
The deregulation movement was pushed / funded by people who would benefit from deregulation. If they thought the public would benefit, they wouldn’t have done it.
Actually they're neutral on whether the public benefits.
I hear this from republicans/conservatives all the time, but there is never a substantive answer as to why.
Even without a degree in business, it is common sense that Big fish eat little fish.
The bigger company, without restraints, will have access to better suppliers, better prices, better lawyers, and will beat out the competition.
Yeah their are specific industries (in their infancy) like aerospace (space travel), microchips, and a few others that do better with small firms, but that is because of how fast moving those industries are.
Most of the economy is stagnant or slow moving, there is no genius invention around the corner ready to throw a wrench into the competition.
So why, not including government intervention/regulations, would less regulation lead to more competition?
And btw I am not saying competition is good, I think this country fetishizes competition, but that is besides the point.
So why do you as a republican believe this if it goes against all common sense?
I hear this from republicans/conservatives all the time, but there is never a substantive answer as to why.
Even without a degree in business, it is common sense that Big fish eat little fish.
The bigger company, without restraints, will have access to better suppliers, better prices, better lawyers, and will beat out the competition.
Yeah their are specific industries (in their infancy) like aerospace (space travel), microchips, and a few others that do better with small firms, but that is because of how fast moving those industries are.
Most of the economy is stagnant or slow moving, there is no genius invention around the corner ready to throw a wrench into the competition.
So why, not including government intervention/regulations, would less regulation lead to more competition?
And btw I am not saying competition is good, I think this country fetishizes competition, but that is besides the point.
So why do you as a republican believe this if it goes against all common sense?
Deregulation gives more companies with more opportunity to innovate. Both of those give the consumer more and better choices at a better prices. Where republicans go wrong is allowing industries like airlines and telecom to consolidate. We need to break up the large airlines and telecom companies.
Jimmy Carter deregulated the beer industry in 1979. At the time, there were only a couple of dozen beer manufacturers like Annheiser-Busch, Miller Brewing Co., Pabst, Joseph Schlitz, Adolph Coors, Olympia, etc. Today, there are THOUSANDS of craft beer companies, many nationally successful.
I am not saying this is the biggest impact deragulation has every had. I just thought this makes for a crystal clear example of how competition explodes when regulations are minimized, and how it benefits the consumer.
Jimmy Carter deregulated the beer industry in 1979. At the time, there were only a couple of dozen beer manufacturers like Annheiser-Busch, Miller Brewing Co., Pabst, Joseph Schlitz, Adolph Coors, Olympia, etc. Today, there are THOUSANDS of craft beer companies, many nationally successful.
I am not saying this is the biggest impact deragulation has every had. I just thought this makes for a crystal clear example of how competition explodes when regulations are minimized, and how it benefits the consumer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by madison999
Hi my name is Henry Ford.
Have you heard of me? Heard of the Selden patent?
It is against common sense. Regulation that has safety and environmental standards means higher quality.
There are different types of regulations, the aforementioned and regulation that targets large companies.
Because again, the big fish will always eat the little fish.
It is against common sense. Regulation that has safety and environmental standards means higher quality.
There are different types of regulations, the aforementioned and regulation that targets large companies.
Because again, the big fish will always eat the little fish.
Not true. Are you ignoring all the food recalls put out DAILY ?
Big companies are big proponents of complex, expensive regulations because it prevents any competition.
When there is no competition then they can charge what they want, lower their standards, etc.
But government and companies have convinced so many people that without regulations you will die in one form or another.
Here..take a gander.....arsenic in baby food, salmonella in pet food, listeria in organic mushrooms, etc.
So much for your "safety and higher quality".
I hear this from republicans/conservatives all the time, but there is never a substantive answer as to why.
Even without a degree in business, it is common sense that Big fish eat little fish.
The bigger company, without restraints, will have access to better suppliers, better prices, better lawyers, and will beat out the competition.
Yeah their are specific industries (in their infancy) like aerospace (space travel), microchips, and a few others that do better with small firms, but that is because of how fast moving those industries are.
Most of the economy is stagnant or slow moving, there is no genius invention around the corner ready to throw a wrench into the competition.
So why, not including government intervention/regulations, would less regulation lead to more competition?
And btw I am not saying competition is good, I think this country fetishizes competition, but that is besides the point.
So why do you as a republican believe this if it goes against all common sense?
Regulation raises costs. Lowering costs causes more to enter that filed.
Competition is good. It lowers cost and raises quality. Plus it gives we the people more options.
This is all basic. How in the world do you not know this?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
