The Problem:
Regulations, at best, are a zero-sum game, creating win-lose scenarios and relationships; the "winners" being the public that are perceived to "benefit" from the regulations, and the losers being the businesses that are forced to expend valuable resources in order to comply.
Regulations, contrary to what current and past presidential administrations believe, are anti-free market. They hurt competition and make the business environment difficult for entrepreneurs and start-ups to get a foot-hold in the market, resulting in many of them closing their doors. In many instances larger companies are ready willing and able to absorb the losses imposed by regulations and actually collude with politicians to get them passed in Congress, knowing full-well smaller companies would find it difficult to survive, and thus, suppressing and preventing competition.
The Solution:
The answer to the problem of regulations is quite simple, but requires an understanding of history and philosophy.
First, a historical context of the Commerce Clause is needed. The government claims to get its authority to regulate from the Commerce Clause (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3) in the United States Constitution, which grants Congress the right "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” The word “regulate” is the keyword in the aforementioned clause. As many of us know, language changes and evolves over time, as do definitions of words. The power that the Framers intended to give to Congress was the power to keep trade and commerce REGULAR, that is, to tear down trade barriers and restrictions to trade, not to enforce them! Today, the word regulate has taken on a much different meaning with the exact opposite of its intention. Thus, regulations, as we know them today, are unconstitutional and illegal.
Second, the philosophy of self-interest must be understood. We as a society must embrace and acknowledge the idea of one acting in one’s own self-interest and selfishness as something good. Our society today has a warped view of what self-interest is all about. It gets wrongly cast aside as a philosophy of self-destruction and has gone from being a virtue to a vice. Self-interest is one acting not just for one’s short-term gain, but long-term gain as well. The only way to successfully achieve long-term gain when dealing with others is through the creation of win-win relationships. One might believe that businesses who act to purposely defraud their customers are acting in their own self-interest for a quick short-term gain, but actually they are working for their own long-term destruction, whether they realize it or not, because eventually word-of-mouth spreads and consumers will eventually stop shopping at their place of business. A business truly acting in their self-interest would have a long-term mindset and create relationships with their customers that are positive, thus assuring their business’ success in the future.
We do not need regulations but an enforcement of our Constitutional individual rights. Laws to protect those rights from infringement from rogue companies and individuals are what is truly needed, not regulations, to protect us in the marketplace. There is absolutely no reason why the government should be creating win-lose scenarios. All it creates is an untrusting society. A change in philosophy to the promotion and understanding of what self-interest really means is vital to changing course in this country to get us back on the road to prosperity. What we need is a separation of state and economics; a truly unrestricted laissez-faire capitalist system to stop collusion from coercively preventing competition in the marketplace and to allow businesses to do what they do best.
