Comments (1)

• Paul Marks

  It has often been pointed out what the solution to all this is.

  If government regulations are really for the "good of the customers" then they should be made voluntary.

  Some business enterprises would proudly have a sign (like the Blue Eagle sign back in the early 1930's) showing that they complied with the government's way of doing business.

  And business enterprises that did not want to comply would not be allowed to display the sign (the government's trademark as it were).

  Customers would find out which type of business provided them with the best goods and services - the ones that did it the government way, or the ones that did it their own way.

  If the government people (and their supporters in the media and academia) are so certain that their way (the regulations) is the best way to do business (in the interests of the customers) they will have no objection to the above.

  If, however, government regulations are a statist power trip the government people (and their supporters) will object most strongly.

  Fraud would remain fraud (and the law of fraud is far older than the S.E.C.), but the best defence even against fraud is the reputation of a business.

  Most established business people are not really interested in cheating their customers and running off to Brazil (or whereever) when they are exposed (and there are always people with an interest in exposing them).

  For people who want low risk, low return investments there will always be business enterprises that will meet their demand. Government regulations just add to costs and give people a false sense of security - "I do not need to be careful in reseaching this high return offer - the government is looking out for me".

  The costs of government regulations are real, but the security they are supposed to bring is an illusion.

  Published: June 9, 2006 9:22 AM