tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5404820640426099135.post1820045221781409360..comments2023-10-31T00:46:35.316+13:00Comments on Anti-Dismal: An example of good regulation?Paul Walkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13731003529546075700noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5404820640426099135.post-79063261861552065222020-07-10T23:00:23.871+12:002020-07-10T23:00:23.871+12:00>Can the market not design these rules for itse...>Can the market not design these rules for itself?<br /><br />No<br />That's how you end up with child laborers working 14 hours in factories and getting lung cancer before they're 20Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5404820640426099135.post-74212287738265087292009-05-13T15:43:00.000+12:002009-05-13T15:43:00.000+12:00"I'm not sure what the distinction is, but I suspe..."I'm not sure what the distinction is, but I suspect it might be something like: rules that are required to let markets operate (e.g. by defining and protecting property rights, by reinforcing solutions to co-ordination problems like which side of the road to drive on) vs rules designed to override market outcomes."<br /><br />Matt: I think you are right there are regulations that help the market operate and those that don't. My question would be, Do we really need the government to set up the rules that make the market operate? Can the market not design these rules for itself?Paul Walkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13731003529546075700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5404820640426099135.post-82565375782146014072009-05-13T10:55:00.000+12:002009-05-13T10:55:00.000+12:00I think Stephen makes a good point. There is a dis...I think Stephen makes a good point. There is a distinction between regulations that create freedom and those that fight it.<br /><br />I'm not sure what the distinction is, but I suspect it might be something like: rules that are required to let markets operate (e.g. by defining and protecting property rights, by reinforcing solutions to co-ordination problems like which side of the road to drive on) vs rules designed to override market outcomes.<br /><br />Its these latter rules that are the problem and the home of unintended consequences, for a number of reasons.matt bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5404820640426099135.post-4381431532807848472009-05-12T09:59:00.000+12:002009-05-12T09:59:00.000+12:00Heh. Driving on one side of the road nicely demons...Heh. Driving on one side of the road nicely demonstrates that most regulations are either destructive or useless. Having a law mandating which side of the road to drive isn't very harmful, nor very useful. Driving on one side of the road is a self-enforcing agreement. I'm not aware of any country which didn't have a de facto rule before government mandated it...Brad Taylorhttp://bradtaylor.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5404820640426099135.post-68432114564522708202009-05-12T02:54:00.000+12:002009-05-12T02:54:00.000+12:00If its so good why do many countries drive on the ...If its so good why do many countries drive on the left?Paul Walkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13731003529546075700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5404820640426099135.post-32408109034101842092009-05-12T02:28:00.000+12:002009-05-12T02:28:00.000+12:00What about the regulation that traffic must drive ...What about the regulation that traffic must drive on the right hand side of the road? That one seems to be good to me.Stephen Monradhttp://www.stephenmonrad.comnoreply@blogger.com