Amazon.com Widgets

Should capitalism have many regulations? If so, how tight should they be?

Asked by: ArrowCat
  • Power in the hands of the corporation is a mistake.

    First of all, I know companies like making products in order to improve society and make it better; however,corporations don't actually care about people themselves, for they are naturally greedy. Corporations will do anything to make cheap products at any cost, whether that's harming the environment or the people in the factories that work for them. Corporations even move out of the country in order to pay their workers less whic is lamentable. I know they are trying to compete in the free market, but at the cost of ruining our resources and harming people is not moral. There are great safety regulations in the U.S because we have a more stable government, but when our companies move to China or Mexico, they do not take their moral practices with them because they don't have to which is wrong in my view. Also, there are approximately 31 provinces in China that are considered cancer villages out of 32 of them which is shocking to me since the chemicals from the factories over there cause a lot of pollution because they are a linear production system- taking no renewable resources and using them up to create products that aren't reusable. I think there should be a regulation on how clean a sory of a corporation is, especially overseas because a U.S company should represent what the United States is and still follow the rules wherever they are. We need a circular production system where we take a renewable resource like water, solar, or wind power to generate electricity to the factories the produce products that can be partially, but preferably totally recycled in the end. So companies that want a linear production system should have a tax in which they pay a certain amount if their factory pollutes the environment or is toxic to the people. I also thing that people should get paid a fair wage rather than not. In Mexico before the NAFTA trade agreement, poor Chiapas corn farmers were making barely enough to get by, but once tariffs on imports of corn came in, they were put out of work and either had to move to a new city, the U.S, join the drug cartel, or join a factory that was placed on the land, however the bottom 90% of people who joined factories saw a decrease in their income rather than an increase as well as the jobs provided by the factory started letting more people go. I think companies that already have good practices, like Costco, shouldn't get taxed since they are doing what they can to provide benefits to their employees and at least a 12$ wage, while Walmart pays half of their employees minimum wage and no benefits along with them. These are two different companies with two different ideas on how to treat their workers. So there has to be regulations on what a company can do, especially when they are outsourcing.

  • Power in the hand of a corporation leads to more harm than good.

    First of all, I know companies like making products in order to improve society and make it better; however,corporations don't actually care about people themselves, for they are naturally greedy. Corporations will do anything to make cheap products at any cost, whether that's harming the environment or the people in the factories that work for them. I know they are trying to compete in the free market, but at the cost of ruining our resources and harming people is not moral. There are great safety regulations in the U.S because we have a more stable government, but when our companies move to China or Mexico, they do not take their moral practices with them. Also, there are approximately 31 provinces in China that are considered cancer villages out of 32 of them which is shocking to me since the chemicals from the factories over there cause a lot of pollution because they are a linear production system- taking nonrenewable resources and using them up to create products that aren't reusable. I think there should be a regulation on how clean a sory of a corporation is, especially overseas because a U.S company should represent what the United States is and still follow the rules. We need a circular production system where we take a renewable resource like water, solar, or wind power to generate electricity to factories and produce products that can be partially or totally recycled in the end. Companies that want a linear production system should have a tax-they pay a certain amount if their factory pollutes the environment&harms people. I also thing that people should get paid a fair wage rather than not. In Mexico before the NAFTA trade agreement, poor Chiapas corn farmers were making barely enough to get by, but once tariffs on imports of corn came in, they were put out of work and either had to move to a new city, the U.S, join the drug cartel, or join a factory that was placed on the land, however the bottom 90% of people who joined factories saw a decrease in their income rather than an increase as well as the jobs provided by the factory started letting more people go. I think companies that already have good practices, like Costco, shouldn't get taxed since they are doing what they can to provide benefits to their employees and at least a 12$ wage, while Walmart pays half of their employees minimum wage and no benefits along with them. These are two different companies with two different ideas on how to treat their workers. Yes, people ith money can decide where to shop and where not to shop because they can financially afford other things, but consumers now a days do not have the income to go shop wherever and they don't have the time re research how a company is treating their workers and manufacturers. So there has to be regulations on what a company can do, especially when they are outsourcing.

  • Absolute power in the hands of government is tyranny, but so is absolute power in the hands of corporations...

    Regulations are necessary in a capitalist system. The government should provide a basic framework within which economic actors should behave. If it doesn't, then there is the risk of an overwhelmingly disproportionate amount of power concentrated in the hands a corporate elite, and this is still a form of tyranny, even if these institutions are not public and do not belong to the government.

    From a practical perspective, the nations with the highest standard of living in the world are those where governments provide the framework for economic activity. Ideally, economic and market power should as 'spread-out' as must as possible and not concentrated. This is the key to market regulation: it's a check on corporate and business power. Surely as Americans, you can appreciate the idea of checks and balances, given that the entire government structure of the USA is based on checks and balances.

    There is a reason why people who live in Scandinavia and other like countries have an excellent quality of life: it's because the rules that govern institutions are equitable and balanced.

  • Regulations are necessary for a healthy society.

    I think everybody should do a little google search for me. Go and research 19th century working conditions. Here is a link to a site which talks about it (http://countrystudies.Us/united-states/history-82.Htm). As you can see before regulations came about the US was not a good place to be a worker. Child labour was common and working conditions were harsh. Regulations can provide some much needed stability to capitalism and in the correct places will ensure humane working conditions while not stifling economic growth and in some ways helping it by providing a far more stable environment.

  • Regulations absolutely necessary for a functioning society

    The question is a little vague-- what is the threshold for "tight," or how extensive is "many." If the question is do we need some regulation, the answer is absolutely yes. Clean air, clean water, safe food, infrastructure, and so many other public goods are not adequately, if at all, provided by the pure market. Among countless examples, I like the fact that the elevator I take to the 5th floor at work is inspected yearly.

  • While the government should mostly stay out of a company's business, some regulations for the safety and sanity of the workers is required

    Many companies may face lawsuits from families in the event of a worker's death - these lawsuits are often more expensive then the safety measures companies take - and less death within the company means a better overall public image, and thus higher profit.

    While business owner's should have the right to operate their business however they choose, the worker's have rights as well that should not be taken away, and should be put in place for their safety and their own financial gain.

    About a hundred years ago, when restrictions on the market were much tighter, the world actually received more economic growth then it does today when the government is less involved, and the market is freer.

  • Regulations absolutely necessary for a functioning society

    The question is a little vague-- what is the threshold for "tight," or how extensive is "many." If the question is do we need some regulation, the answer is absolutely yes. Clean air, clean water, safe food, infrastructure, and so many other public goods are not adequately, if at all, provided by the pure market. Among countless examples, I like the fact that the elevator I take to the 5th floor at work is inspected yearly.

  • When has a business ever put profit ahead of welfare?

    After all, it's not like they set up sweatshops in developing countries where people are paid nothing and that they'd make an entire industry off of the suffering and pain of countless living creatures. While we live in a world where humans are clearly perfect and cannot give in to greed, it's just ridiculous to think we'd ever need regulations. Don't believe what those dirty socialist have to say, because a better world to live in is one without any consideration for human welfare, animal welfare, minimum wage, healthcare, or perspective. Seriously, how could letting a bunch of opportunistic facilities based entirely on their own expansion possibly end badly?

  • Regulations solve nothing:

    This is not me saying I think that large scale economics works but I do know that regulation is pointless particularly because not only would you need a team dedicated to constant updates but you would also need a team dedicated to working through the constancy of managing rules related to what is and isn't socially and fiscally acceptable. None of this is free.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.