Anti-regulation is antithetical to modern economies

[phattonez]

Not quite. Financial advisers can push a product that is good for them and not feasible for the client without committing fraud. There is of course however, regulation requiring advisers first to examine the feasibility of the product for the client. Remove that regulation and what's stopping them from pushing high commission products that aren't good for clients but are too complex for the average client to figure out that it's not good for them?

I just need an example because the ones you provided in the first post were fraud. I don't know, maybe it's a fine line between fraud and selling a product.

 

[phattonez]

Directly or indirectly? Do you doubt that are morons here who don't realize that some arguments they make are doing just that?

If there are, I haven't heard them.

 

[Solidus]

"Regulation in effect prevents or at least attempts to prevent the abuse of asymmetrical information."

Information is the cure for asymmetrical information, not regulation. This is how the free-market addresses the issue itself, see Consumer Reports, Yelp, etc. In a free-market people with specialized skills or knowledge can profit from sharing their knowledge in addition to laboring with it. For example, the plumber can write a book helping laypeople identify shady plumbers, subpar workmanship, etc. in addition to performing plumbing tasks. Furthermore, this sharing of knowledge is only profitable by "doing the right thing for the sake of others".

"Furthermore, being overly anti-regulation often requires a belief that people are inherently good and will do the right thing without ulterior motives for the sake of others."

A vast majority of people are inherently good, otherwise we would not have made it this far. People who seek to downsize regulation tend to believe that the free-market includes incentives that punish people who do not do the right thing, or otherwise abuse their customers.

If you believe that sans regulation a vast majority of plumbers would be dishonest, then under a free-market the honest plumber would be able to profit from his honesty and his customers would also profit from the higher quality of work. The dishonest plumbers may be able to squeak by, but there is tremendous incentive to be an honest plumber. Only when most plumbers are honest can there by gains by being dishonest, and even then reputation goes a long way to correcting this asymmetry (again see Yelp, etc.).

Lastly, your position assumes that all regulation is written by subject matter experts. Given the large disparity between expert recommendations and what gets implemented via the political process this is observably false.

J