The problem with regulation is that the regulators are humans just like the regulated. They are as corrupt and as incompetent as the regulated. Moreover, there is no good way to judge the performance of the regulators, so they tend to stay in the job forever, protected by civil service rules. Judging the regulators by the number of cases brought and/or won just leads to additional corruption. To get promoted, the regulators must have wins, so they "create" some.
And then regulation bring rules such as the "Delaney clause" which requires that suspected carcinogens must be eliminated from products down to infinitesimal levels of presence, no matter how much good the product is doing nor how costly the elimination is. There is no presentation of the "science" to the user and allowing the user to decide his own risk tolerance. Fred Holmes At 08:34 PM 2/28/2010, tjpa wrote: >On Feb 28, 2010, at 8:10 PM, mike wrote: >>It's frightening to think there are some out there who believe all >>regulation is inherently good. > >No body wrote that. There are certainly a percent or two of >regulations that are not beneficial. Those will, of course, be the >only regulations that the neocons will want to talk about. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
