Centerfield

"My point is that the nature of regulation of industries who have proven themselves prone to exploiting consumers when left to their own devices is a subject worth having a discussion about."

True, we can improve policy by doing useful analyses of the equal and opposite evils of industry and government corruption and incompetence. Finding a dynamic balance that doesn't provide structural incentives for abuse is difficult, something that needs much discussion.

The first step is to recognize that brute force control harms the public as much as complete lack of regulation. Everything is currently highly regulated but not well regulated. If our objective is to benefit society as a whole rather than just advance the interests of politicians (such as Dean) then we must do insightful analysis and graceful interventions in systems to tame them a bit without crippling them.

Very well put.

I agree with back40 that there is a very real difference between highly regulated and well regulated. I believe, too, that we need to carefully consider what industries should be regulated and to what extent.

The energy situation in California is a classic example of how NOT to de-regulate in my estimation. My personal opinion is that public utilities should never be fully privatized. I haven't seen any evidence of increased competition leading to lower prices for my gas and electricity. Instead, all I've seen is price increases by the same energy providers we have always had because now they are more driven by profit.

I am as much for free enterprise as the next person, but I'm not sure privatization and deregulation is necessarily a good thing for an industry on which we are so dependent.

Well, here's the problem: we're dealing with human institutions. Come up with any reasonable (I'll let the reader determine what's reasonable) set of regulations, and human self-interest will quickly compensate and that will require a change in regulations,...and away we go.

Here's my take: Self-interest must be balanced by civic interest. Everyone-for-themselves capitalism will not work. The authors of our Constitution knew this. It's a balancing act that will never reach perfect balance.

That's why we were given a republic IF WE CAN KEEP IT. Constant maintenance is required!

Brian,

I disagree with your basic premise that these "Industires" are left to their own devices. In fact, I assert that the very problems that you speak of are created by too much government interference. Most of the rules and regulations already in place were put their by politicians who were bought off by these particular industries, and even the laws that are enacted with the best of intentions often lead to more harm than good. For example, why do you think these stock brokers and investment bankers can get away with what they do? It's because certain rules and regulations exist that give them a special advantage over the average investor. Big business is allowed to use its power to get laws passed that stifle competition, often under the guise of protecting the consumer.

I'm not saying that a truly "Free Market" would be perfect and never out of balance, but the imbalances would be much smaller and self-correcting if left alone and the government simply did its job of enforcing the laws of the constitution equally.

As we have degregulated many industries, which I fully support, it has become apparent that we also stopped watching them carefully enough. A more careful oversite to assure these markets and businesses remain free and honest is required.

As others above have stated, this is a balancing act and we will never get it just right.

One of the best ways to keep these markets honest is to punish the wrong doers and punish them severely. This means huge fines and significant jail time. We are seeing this happen today and it makes this capitalists' heart feel good.