Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by genderwhy 1222 days ago
Thanks. That's the opposite (the government is protecting corporate interests too much) of what the usual "It's the feds fault" usually implies.
2 comments

No, it's not the opposite.

Regulations often have the effect of protecting entrenched corporate interests.

Government regulation hurting competition, and hurting the free market by "protecting corporate interests too much" is precisely what people are often complaining about.

Supporting the free market would instead be when you allow competition, and do not protect the entrenched corporations too much.

Copyright and IP laws are probably the quintessential example of government harming the free market by preventing competitors from competing.

What does it usually imply?
"All these safety regulations slow down the free market! Anyone should be able to make and sell insulin! If it's poisonous, people just won't buy that!"
I mean… the FDA could drastically reduce the price of drugs and prevent shortages by allowing imports of medicines approved in the EU or Canada.
For sure, but also I don't want "Joe's Discount Basement Insulin" to be on the market. I do think we should allow imports of medicines from some places in the world as long as they meet a verifiable safety standard.
We could also just nationalize the drug industry. Public funds pay for research already don't they? Why even let corporations in on this, just do it all ourselves and let the sociopaths go exploit adtech or some shit that's less likely to get people killed.