My summary will be brief as this discussion has already gone on long enough and I have already put forth what I believe to be a convincing case for myself.
Regulations may be beneficial in some hypothetical universe where the government is not plagued by greed and incompetence, but we are talking about the United States government. In response to the question of if regulation by the federal government is beneficial to the economy, the answer has to be no based on what we have observed. Government regulation has crushed the entrepreneurial spirit, prevented small businesses from thriving, and forced businesses to move overseas. Capitalism does not work when the market is artificially manipulated by the government.
To defend my use of the government bailout as a talking point, I bring it up to illustrate how government intervention prevents the free market from regulating itself. Rather than letting banks that employed unethical business practices fail on their own, the government paid the bill for their failure and did not allow more competent banks to fill the gaps in the market. This example illuminates the short-sighted thinking used by the federal government when it tries to intervene with the free market. In this example, and many others, its best if the government just stays out of the way.
While government regulation may seem like a good idea on paper, the reality is that it causes more harm than good. Better to let businesses succeed or fail on their own rather than creating an oppressive atmosphere that discourages anyone from even trying. Regulation in the United States has a proven track record of being toxic to the economy and I don't see how that could possibly change any time soon.
|