Confronting Washington's Job Killers

How costly and unnecessary regulations cripple the American economy

The news that the Environmental Protection Agency prevented early clean-up of floating oil in the Gulf by refusing to waive its “clean water” limit of 15 parts per million should make us all focus on the job killing structure in Washington, D.C. Just three days after the BP spill, the Dutch government offered their oil-skimming ships and ocean oil-cleansing technology, but were rejected because the cleaned ocean water would not reach the EPA’s limits of being 99.9985 percent pure. Imagine if even half the oil had been skimmed off; the rest probably would not have even reached shore because oil degrades quickly in warm ocean water. But because oil did reach the shore, Washington ordered a moratorium on all deep water drilling over 500 feet in the Gulf, and a moratorium on all offshore drilling in Alaska and off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. In Louisiana, the order is causing an estimated loss of tens of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars of oil production over the next two years. Blue-collar jobs on Gulf oil rigs earn an average of $60,000 per year.

An economic crisis with high unemployment is the best time to confront and even possibly reform Washington’s job-killing laws. Most Americans are either uninformed about the quantity and consequences of these laws or they regard them as normal. So now is the time to recognize, enumerate, and challenge the worst of them. But to reform bad laws, first you need to get them debated in public.

All too often we hear that cheap Chinese labor is wrecking havoc with our industries. In reality, it is a host of costly, job-killing burdens from Washington that are responsible. How many investments and job creations are not made because of compliance costs associated with excessively strict regulations (and the lawsuits they generate)? It’s no wonder that our great achievements nowadays are in fields such as electronics, movies, and games, where entrepreneurs and innovators face less government obstructions, lawsuits, and labor costs. Compare this to an investor trying to build new factories or mines.

For example, in a remote area of Alaska, efforts to start up one of the world’s richest copper and gold mines is stymied by unending Kafkaesque regulations and lawsuits. In Utah, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar arbitrarily cancelled 77 previously issued oil/gas leases because the smell produced by the drilling might affect air quality in the desert near national parks. New mining ventures today have mostly moved to Canada to avoid such unnecessary hassles.

Another prime example is nuclear electric power, which could be cheap and abundant. China is building 60 new nuclear plants over the next 10 years, while in Washington it takes 10 years to build even a single plant. Both the Chinese and the French build them in a bit over 3 years. President Barack Obama said he favored such plants and proposed billions of dollars in subsidies, but he made no mention of the obstructive permitting process that makes nuclear power so uneconomical. Remember also that nuclear energy plants are an established technology. Why does each plant have to go through such a bureaucratic rigmarole?

The EPA’s extremism and vicious fines and penalties are a primary reason why America is falling behind much of the world. Yet we hear complaints from the usual suspects that the only jobs America produces are service ones. The consequence of that view is growing trade protectionism, since we blame foreigners for “unfair” competition. This causes even more job losses: Witness the inability of Congress to ratify new trade agreements with Korea and Colombia.

Government created jobs appear to cost an average $200,000 each according to various studies. Many are for non-economic, artificially-created jobs such as those in alternative energy, which is extraordinarily expensive. Washington does all that it can to obfuscate the costs of its subsidies and tax favors.

Fortunately we still have breakthroughs, such as with the new discovery of horizontal oil drilling and rock fracturing. America has such dynamism that economic growth still occurs despite the government’s many efforts to hinder it.  

Herewith is a list of immediate ways to create more jobs.

• Review EPA limits to identify and modify excessive and job-destroying regulations. As the oil cleansing limits discussed above indicate, many EPA restrictions are not based on realistic threats, but rather seem based upon the limits of its measuring abilities. They are often irrational and punitive and do nothing to secure health, safety, or prosperity.

• Revise depreciation schedules. American real estate companies, for example, must depreciate new roofs or new boilers over 27 years. Lowering that rate to 5 years would instigate enormous new activity for the building trades, providing tens or hundreds of thousands of sold blue-collar jobs.

• Reform the public sector. Billions in state funds could be directed towards hiring and construction if the money wasn’t committed to exorbitant pension and health benefit packages for public sector workers. Possible solutions include court challenges, firings, sub-contracting, and laws preventing public sector unions from going on strike. Louisiana and New Jersey are leading the way.

• Stop fighting endless foreign wars. Just think if the trillion dollars spent on Iraq had been used to rebuild our infrastructure. China, for example, is using its money to build massive new highways and high-speed rail between every major city. Meanwhile, it costs us 250,000 bullets for each dead guerrilla, half a million dollars to place each soldier (and his back-up) overseas, and $45 per gallon of fuel landed in Afghanistan. Little of this spending creates jobs in America.

• Stop passing vague laws. The new bank reform act, for instance, is expected to make small business loans harder to get and put new burdens on small banks. Among other restrictions, it requires bankers to verify that a loan is “suitable” for a given customer. That sort of vague language will inspire lawsuits, which in turn will result in the banks denying future loans.

• Make cheap electricity accessible. Government regulations (and regulation-inspired lawsuits) now prohibit or delay the building of new coal-generated plants as well as nuclear plants. Freeing up access to this cheap electricity would allow firms to prosper and hire more workers.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • DesigNate||

    How dare you suggest ways to fix what's broken without including more government control!

  • Peter Jensen||

    The Dutch seem to be able to have efficient "government control".

  • ||

    Past recessions have been largely self-correcting. They have self-corrected in a matter of a few months. Why is it taking so long for that to happen this time around? What's standing in the way of the self-correcting mechanism?

    The answer is relatively obvious to anyone with open eyes. The overarching factor that is making this recession different is that the Obama agenda is qualitatively and quantitatively different from any previous president's agenda. The anomaly of the current recession is the anomaly of Barak Obama's political philosophy and worldview.

    Their "crony socialism" or state controlled economic model verses letting the free market do what the free market does - risk and reward - coupled with deficit spending on a level never seen before, has this nation headed toward a "double dip" recession and a repeat of the French Revolution.

  • Drax the Destroyer||

    Uh-oh Utley. You just tacitly supported Wal-Mart, and by extension profit in the health care sector. That's on par with denying the Holocaust in the public realm of discussion. You should start erecting that chicken-wire ASAP.

  • DG||

    With a name like Jon Basil Utley, you just know the author wears a top hat and monocle. Probably has a handlebar mustache, too. In other words, a true libertarian.

  • Jeffersonian||

    And here I thought we were all wild-eyed, bomb-tossing maniacs.

  • Mike Laursen||

    Oh, no. We're much too self-centered and disinterested in the common folk to bother throwing bombs.

    You must be thinking of anarchists.

  • J||

    I've yet to meet any anarchists that resemble anything Libertarian. The ones I've met seem to just be socialists in disguise, but don't want to admit it. That was, until about two years ago, when being a socialist became fashionable.

    Perhaps I've just met the wrong ones.

  • ||

    Are there no anarcho-capitalists around here, J?

  • ||

    I'm all about the monocle. Knew there was a reason I was a libertarian.

  • Almanian||

    So, this is today's "dog bites man" article, right?

  • ||

    Is there a reason you find this article extraneous? Or do you mean it in the good-luck-trying-to-get-assholes-in-DC-to-reform kind of way?

  • JoshINHB||

    Your list needs to include:

    Repeal ADA

    Revise or repeal the endangered species act.

    Eliminate discrimination in employment lawsuits.

    Tort Reform.

    Rationalize health laws to actually promot health.

    Roll back work place "safety" rules.

    End taxation of wages.

  • ||

    Repeal the EPA. Not an enumerated power in the constitution. If the states are clamoring for environmental regulation, let them pay for their own state version of the EPA.

  • slayer of beer||

    That said, some of its functions are the sort of thing that, if they should be performed at all, should be performed at the federal level. That is, if the constitution was drafted after the industrial revolution and individual states had already started regulating the associated pollution, controlling interstate or international pollution (e.g., of air, oceans, rivers & waterways) would seem to the sort of thing that deserved federal jurisdiction.

  • Moon Knight||

    I'd like to add to your list the severe limitation or outright elimination of lawsuits against Pharma's for a particular drug once that drug has gone throught the long, expensive, byzantine FDA approval process.

  • Chad||

    But the multiplier for G is > 1. I know because Paul Krugmann told me, and he won a Noble Prize. So the more money the government spends, the better off we all are.

  • ||

    Not bad, but you really need to include considerably more smug when spoofing Choad. You didn't even claim any positions of moral supremacy.

    C+

  • Sean W. Malone||

    And you didn't mention McMansions or "Cheap Chinese Crap", and then proceed to berate people's social & economic habits while claiming that anything the government spends money on would be wiser than what an average (dumb) American wanted to spend his own money on.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Also, a lack of "teh externalities".

  • ||

    I caution you on the AK gold mining operation. Check the watersheds and river system involved and get back to me.

  • it's always 4:20!||

    Laws and regulations are created for the sole purpose of turning hoards of lawyers into millionaires as they argue the stuff out in court.

  • ||

    There are hoards of lawyers? Where? In underground caverns? I must tell you, I'm an attorney, and I've never heard of such a thing.

  • Almanian||

    Ah - so you're not a 33rd degree lawyer then...

  • it's always 4:20!||

    Washington D.C.

  • it's always 4:20!||

    There are more lawyers than anything else in most yellow pages.

    People argue about the stupidest shit in court.
    We'd be so much more civilized if everyone carried a pistol and could go home to get their machine gun and some grenades if they felt the need.

    An armed society is a polite society.

  • ||

    A great deal of progress could be made if judges would actually issue sanctions for frivolous litigation or if ethics violations were regularly and consistently dealt with.

  • it's always 4:20!||

    In my perfect world there would be a third chamber of Congress tasked with repealing laws and regulation, and its members would run for office not based upon what they would do but what they would undo.

    That was intended to be a task of the courts, but they are derelict in their duty.

  • ||

    The Censor!

  • it's always 4:20!||

    "I note one proposal to make this Congress a two-house body. Excellent, the more impediments to legislation the better. But, instead of following tradition, I suggest one house of legislators, another whose single duty is to repeal laws. Let the legislators pass laws only with a two-thirds majority... while the repealers are able to cancel any law through a mere one-third minority. Preposterous? Think about it. If a bill is so poor that it cannot command two-thirds of your consents, is it not likely that it would make a poor law? And if a law is disliked by as many as one-third is it not likely that you would be better off without it?"
    - Heinlein's The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress

  • ||

    What I've proposed--perhaps too many times--is a fourth branch of government but more akin to the Court than to the Congress: The Censor. The censorial branch would include some number of censors who would have removal powers over all federal officials (with checks of some sort from other branches) and maybe some sort of limited veto power or review power.

  • it's always 4:20!||

    On the surface that seems like a good idea, but I think it has too much potential for partisan abuse.

    I would rather remove the officials by repealing the legislation that created their job.

    That way they can't be replaced with a partisan hack since the job no longer exists.

  • ||

    Isolating the censors as much as possible from partisan abuse is the real trick. Still, the Founders dealt with some of this when cobbling together our system. They knew people would do everything possible to seize more power.

  • it's always 4:20!||

    The biggest problem with government is that it is cumulative and there is no mechanism to remove the structure.
    If someone complains of a law the usual refrain is "change it". Repeal is rarely a thought let alone an option.
    When some department or agency is doing more harm than good the usual refrain is "change of leadership".
    Scrapping the whole thing is rarely a thought or an option.

    We have a mindset that once government gets its nose into something that that something cannot exist without government.

    Which is why I would rather repeal laws than change them, and get rid of the Department rather than Censor its head.

  • ||

    That does give me an idea. Give the Censor the right to review laws on the books every so many years. Not sure whether a determination that a law needs to die should be something the Censor could just introduce or do directly. Though I think I like the disruptiveness of laws just getting zapped out of hand.

  • ||

    The biggest problem with government is, it what the populace want and deserve.

  • Camel Toe||

    The government is like the camel in the tent.

  • DLM||

    What I've proposed--perhaps too many times--is a fourth branch of government but more akin to the Court than to the Congress: The Censor.

    I'd like to see a fourth branch of government that is essentially like the CBO/GAO, but independent; able to investigate and report the finances of the country without having to worry about their jobs getting axed by a Congress or a President who doesn't like the results.

  • ||

    I like the Heinlein proposal and I like that proposal, you bloodsucking scoundrel! (adjusts monocle)

  • ||

    On the point of passing a law--this is in fact the function of Amending the constitution, which no where gives the government the power to regulate 99% of the things it regulates today. However, since the Baker case in 1936 passing laws has been completely out of whack. As to the "house of repeal," sign me up for that today.

  • ||

    I propose an amendment along these lines...That any law passed by the congress may be vetoed by 50% of the states (governor or legislature) and only become law by a 2/3 majority of the states (governor or legislature).

  • ||

    I don't think I agree with the revised depreciation schedules for roofs and boilers. Shouldn't the depreciation rate reflect the actual length of life of the asset? Roofs and boilers are definitely designed to last more than 5 years. I fear such an aggressive write off would subsidize real estate businesses to overpurchase roofs and boilers for tax reasons instead of economic ones.

  • Virginia||

    Maybe Utley's playing a private joke on us.

    One of these things is not like the others, one of these things does not belong.

  • Ron||

    I would agree but in California they want laws similar to England where things like boilers will have to be replaced as soon as a more efficient model is built. They have already done that with heavy equipment such as tractors, graders and even diesel pickups. See AB32. I have friends in the business with five year old equipment that can last for forty that they have to replace or upgrade now. They spent 100% of their last years profit to comply with the laws

  • J||

    I just moved to the Bay Area, and met someone who was quite proud of the fact the environmental laws they want will kill the livelihood of conservative Central and Eastern California farmers. He showed the upmost contempt for them because they voted against said policies.

    In sum:

    supporting policies that preserve your livelihood: morally contemptable.

    supporting policies that will kill the livelihood of these famers: morally enlightened.

    Now I see why Brown will probably win.

  • J||

    farmers, not famers.

  • ||

    Now that is just genuinely disturbing. I mean, using the power of the state to steal from someone else to get for yourself is a terrible thing. But using the power of the state to just plain out harm someone without even getting anything out of it is just outright evil.

  • Editor in Absentia ||

    wrecking havoc

    I think you mean wreaking havoc

  • Editor in Absentia ||

    sold blue-collar jobs

    I think you mean solid but maybe not...

  • Editorisuarus||

    I think you meant to post under your previous corrective instead of creating an unnecessary thread.

  • it's always 4:20!||

    So all this talk about job killing is a bunch of crap.

    Tons of jobs are being created... for lawyers.

  • Sean W. Malone||

    And as we all know, the average unemployed American today has a JD.

  • it's always 4:20!||

    The lawyers who write the laws and regulations don't care.

    They only care about creating work for themselves and their buddies.

  • Almanian||

    Caption Contest, anyone?

    "OH it's forty below and I don't give a fuck got a heater in my truck and we're OFF to the rodeoooooo....."

  • ||

    This meme needs to catch on. The more articles like this the better.

    You can have jobs, or you can have a fuckton of regulations, but you can't have both.

  • Neu Mejican||

    Of course the truth of this meme depends upon what the definition of "fuckton" is.

  • it's always 4:20!||

  • CrackertyAssCracker||

    I don't have time for all this Ivory Tower nonsense. All I need to know is this: how many butloads are in a fuckton?

  • Neu Mejican||

    I am not sure of the exact conversion.

    A fuckton seems to be 10 fuckloads. So if you know how many fuckloads make a buttload you can do the conversion.

  • Neu Mejican||

    I like that this article gives specific proposals rather than simply saying "regulation bad." There are many specific counter productive regulations. Of course regulations are typically put in place to address a legitimate concern. Removing or altering regulations without considering the reason the were put in place gets us nowhere, in many cases.

    For instance, coal mining is a dangerous, dirty business. It could be argued that allowing mining companies to operate unsafe and polluting mines socializes their costs and works as a subsidy on coal. Regulations requiring them to operate safer and less polluting mines increases their cost by taking some of that socialized cost and putting back in their hands.

  • JoshINHB||

    True, however the real problem is that the marginal value of the regualtions decreases with the increased volume.

    So the 1940s regulation that prevented a community's water supply from being poluted at a cost of pennies per consumer has become the 00s regulation that prevents 1/2 of one death per year at the cost of many hundreds or thousands of dollars per consumer.

  • ||

    The oil moratorium was put in place for an illegitimate concern. The judge called it capricious and the experts said that capping those wells created more risk than doing nothing. The moratorium was a naked attempt to beat down the oil industry.

  • Neu Mejican||

    I don't think a blanket "illegitimate concern" applies. The concern is legitimate whether or not the response to that concern was properly thought through (a debatable point).

  • Bill||

    I think much of it boils down to an emotional fear response and manyo people have an irrational fear/antipathy to things like: oil, corporations, stuff they don't understand, things not run by the all-knowing government, etc. So we don't need to postulate a conspiracy, except a possibly a confederacy of dunces.

    Plus there was the additional (and always helpful) clamor for "somebody to do something". In this kind of environment, it does not matter if it makes sense, you just have to look like you are in charge and doing something.

  • ||

    I believe the Center for American Progress thoroughly thought through their moratorium. You should be upset that the environmental movement has been hijacked by a bunch of hacks who're using it to pursue a war on energy.

  • Neu Mejican||

    I don't think the environmental movement writ large has been hijacked by hack pursuing a war on energy. Some within it are certainly knee-jerk on the issue, but I don't see the moratorium under discussion as an example.

    As for the CAP, what's your point?

  • ||

    but the Government wants to kill jobs so we all become dependent on it.

  • LA Liberty||

    “Revise depreciation schedules”? It should instead read “eliminate depreciation schedules,” which then lets the market determine when items should be replaced. In fact, I’d prefer the outright elimination of the EPA over simply tweaking how it works. Allowing it to remain in place implicitly accepts its role as a market regulator and concedes that its regulatory wisdom supersedes the free exchange of multitudes of individuals, neither conclusion of which is valid or acceptable.

  • Hate Potion Number Nine||

  • LA Liberty||

    HEY LOOK!

    A picture of a place with little regard to private property rights or mechanisms to protect said rights!

  • Peter Jensen||

    The oil skimmer saga is interesting and revelatory (and sad and annoying). We undoubtedly have a problem in the way we handle public affairs.

    The Dutch and Norwegians on the other hand seem to have no-nonsense and efficient public officials. (As well as a plan in case of oil spills rather than pretending it can't happen!)

  • Will||

    You are a conservative asshole. What are you doing being published on a libertarian site? You are fuckin' statist totalitarian piece of shit. Go fuck yourself!

  • John||

    Just checking for Will's future reference-how many fuckwits to a fucktonne? Is there a metric/imperial conversion table?

  • ||

    What is this, a GOP corporate whore website? Yeah, sure buddy, less regulation is the reason all the jobs left.

    You sir, are a braying ass moron.

  • ||

    Have you ever tried to deal with the government or start a business? Even the average government worker(I don't say employee I am talking about actual technicians mechanics etc) hates many government regulations cause they can turn a simple 2 hour fix involving two guys and 1000 dollars worth of parts into a three day affair involving 15 people and 25000 dollars with of parts and logistical support with an added 2 hours of paperwork.

  • Chad||

    For example, in a remote area of Alaska, efforts to start up one of the world’s richest copper and gold mines is stymied by unending Kafkaesque regulations and lawsuits.

    My god. If this is what passes for "journalism" around here, you may as well shut the magazine down.

    The Pebble mine issue is one of serious trade-offs and risk. If libertarians can't grow up and acknowledge this, you don't deserve a seat at the adults' table.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_Mine

    You know what, you asshats? We SHOULD have "bureacracy" protecting some of the world's largest remaining salmon runs. Get the hell over it.

  • Invective||

    Citing Wikipedia = FAIL

    Now fuck you, twat. Get the hell over THAT.

  • Ron L||

    Chad|8.15.10 @ 11:59AM|#
    "...We SHOULD have "bureacracy" protecting some of the world's largest remaining salmon runs."
    Uh, because a brain-dead says so? Or do you have a reason that you can share with rational people?

    "Get the hell over it."
    I'd suggest you do that, but I doubt you will. You seem to be unable to differentiate between your desires and facts.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    And Chad shows his true anti-capitalist colors yet again.

  • ||

    Dear tinkerbells and peter pans: Here in the Western US we have "bureacratic protectors" in charge of wild horses. Nearly all of them have been rounded up with BLM helicopters into auction pens and sold to slaughterhouses for meat.
    If something as inspiring as wild horses aren't preserved, what hope do a bunch of freakin fish have?
    The last words a free horse hears is the phrase "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."

  • ||

    The whole oil skimming debacle highlights the problem with governments response to everything. Leaders of Government agency looked at this crisis to pad their next years budget. Why did the Coast Guard suddenly make a big deal about lifejacket and fire extinguisher inspections? Cause next year they will go before congress saying they didn't have enough manpower and money to respond quickly to the needs. So now the will get a couple hundred more men one or two more Admiral billets and a couple billion more in budget resources. Heck I woould not be surprised to find the Argiculture Department is making plans to create an Undersecratery for Oil Spill Response and all the additional government employees to monitor the food supply in the case of an oil spill.
    Am I saying that the people incharge didn't respond as fast as they could to simply be able to pad future budgets? YUP!

  • ||

    Guys like Chad make me laugh. Always trying to be a voice of rational reason.

    Look.

    The government functions EXACTLY like organized crime. EXACTLY.

    So go screw yourself. The shit I have to go through to open a fucken day care is a joke that COSTS ME UNNECESSARY MONEY. Worse, the god dang government (here in Quebec) TELLS ME how many kids I can have in a NON-SUBSIDIZED PRIVATE operation based on nothing much more than their own whims. I asked one person how they arrived at their laws and lemme tell you it depressed me.

    Their bull shit decision cost me $200 and not only that, the place I rented was a former PUBLIC day care; that is, it's codes conformed with the government. This was a few years ago. All of a sudden the government decided to reconfigure the sq.ft to jkids ration and that means I have to shell out $50 000 just to bring it up to code.

    That shit DISCOURAGES people from starting a business because it serves as an, anyone, Bueller?, unnecessary OBSTACLE.

    Get that through your fricken head, Chad. Or come on this side of the effen fence and see what decent, honest people face.

    Wait. It gets better. The contractors in the construction business have their own nightmares to tell. Quebec's construction industy is a massive racket run by union goons. The FTQ is a powerful union group that elbows and threatens small contractors into submission. They force them to join their unions based on nothing but intimidation and fines - all while the government watches and does nothing.

    They will literally send people home who are working hard and maybe for a tad under minimum wage (because THERE ARE NO EFFEN JOBS IN QUEBEC since it's basically a SOCIALIST public secotr paradise sunsidized by richer provinces) home for not having a fucken lousy piece of shit PERMIT.

    What happens? They end up on welfare most likely.

    It doesn't end there. My family owns property and we're the ENEMY. That much is clear. It's an anti-business climate and I don't have to effen produce "proof" of critical analysis to a fucken professor to know business is the enemy. We pay excessive property taxes that are nothing short of criminal. These morons representing some union outfit (there are so many we can't keep count) come INTO MY BUILDING during a simple demolishing job and act like THEY OWN the building demanding all sorts of papers and contracts between us and the contractors. You know what they told us: To "protect us".

    FUCK. YOU. They're not there to protect anyone but their own sorry asses and jobs.

    So go back to la-la land or join the real world and then talk, Chad, Tony or any other boob who do nothing but protect state interests that in the end FUCK YOU UP THE ASS.

  • ||

    Don't be ridiculous. Organized crimelords actually give a damn about their profits. But anyways, you should go on a lecture series here in the US so people still curious about neo-socialism can be cured of their mental issues. Personally, I like how US Congress' response to hundreds of companies moving overseas is to establish more regulations. But it pays for the legal fees, and we're all run by a bunch of lawyers anyway (except in Asia, where most politicians have science degrees or some other useful trade)

  • ||

    Sorry for the language.

  • ||

    Some grammar corrections:

    Their bull shit decision cost me $200 a day for the year and not only that, the place I rented was a former PUBLIC day care; that is, it's codes conformed with the government. This was a few years ago. All of a sudden the government decided to reconfigure the sq.ft to kids ratio and that means I have to shell out $50 000 I DON'T HAVE just to bring it up to code. I budgeted for half of that and will have to really work my skills to come up with the rest. Point is, it was not needed.

    That shit DISCOURAGES people from starting a business because it serves as an, anyone, Bueller?, unnecessary OBSTACLE.

    They will literally send people home who are working hard and maybe for a tad under minimum wage (because THERE ARE NO EFFEN JOBS IN QUEBEC since it's basically a SOCIALIST public sector paradise subsidized by richer provinces) home for not having a fucken lousy piece of shit PERMIT.

  • ||

    Beyond fed regs are state regs which often more extensive and onerous to small business, and are often equally non-productive or counter-productive. In these straitened times bureaucrats are assigned by supervisors to write more regs as make work; and they write them in such a fashion as to promote their own job security even further. This corrupt bureaucrat behavior is endemic in Washington State. And as you point out the public is for-the-most unaware it is happening. I doubt even the legislature in our state understands the perfidy and duplicity of the executive and her bureacrats!

  • ||

    Something is very badly wrong when the FIRST employee an entrepreneur MUST hire is an ABA lawyer to navigate the City-County-State-Federal AFL-CIO-AFSCME lockstep bureaucracy. Our nation is infested with millions of worm-tongued bureaucrats and lawyers lurking around every corner looking for another angle to "regulate." Pettifogging lawyers and do-nothing bureaucrats: a marriage made in Hell. Stop this madness!

  • ||

    Obama's handling of the Gulf Oil spill may not be criminal, but it should be. The damage was and is so much worse because his extreme left wing ideology got in the way of a decent clean up and mitigation effort. Obama and the Democrats are killing our economy with their radical ideology. We need massive change in Nov or we may never recover as a nation!!!

  • ||

    On behalf of my local TATBO ( Throw all the Bums Out club): Inform our US Congress that elected officials are like diapers: They require frequent removal before they stink to high heaven. NOV.2, 2010 Change IS Coming!

  • ||

    The author omits the largest job killing, off-shore impetus laws ever invented; the EPA superfund and brownfund acts.

    They stifled the purchase and sale of business, updating outmoded factories (which shut down and moved elsewhere), and idled huge tracts of otherwise usable land as it over reached its bounds much in the same way the 99.5% clean water regulations stopped the gulf clean-up.

  • e'||

    en

  • ||

    Here is an example of a well-funded do-nothing bureaucracy staffed by highly paid do-nothing bureaucrats:

    "The Office of Research Integrity, a federal agency, investigates cases of academic misconduct. Jennifer Bushnick, a spokeswoman, said she could not confirm or deny there was a case pending into the Hauser matter. In any case, she said, no report is imminent."

    read the whole sorry story here:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08.....ef=science

  • ||

    The 28th ammendment can also be called the Tea Party ammendment.

    It includes a 8 year lifetime employment limit for all federal workers. It establishes a 2/3 majority requirement for all bills and laws to be passed. It declares all laws and regulations to be repealed unless they are proven to apply equally to public and private citizens. It decrees that all laws and regulations expire every 8 years.

    It establishes a house of repeal. Each states tea party sends 1 representative to the new house. Every 2 weeks, the people can vote by direct national ballot to repeal any law, regulation, agency, or federal employee (elected or unelected) by a 1/3 or greater vote. These votes would become effective 2 weeks after tallying.

    People are angry, until this amendment is proposed by both houses, or 33 states call for a constitutional convention, I hope they will vote out every incumbent, every election, among many other acts of patriotism.

  • Auld Skool||

    The real issue with regulations is that they were put into place by bureaucrats to cover for the fact that profit-seeking businessmen want to maximize their profits by minimizing their expenses and thus externalize the negative costs of their business. These negative costs could be underpaying workers, shipping poor quality, or disposing of waste (poisons and chemicals) improperly. Unfortunately, politicians favored regulations that can be overbearing when handled incorrectly. So yes big government sucks and so does dirty business practices. I did not see any suggestion as to how to avoid the later in this article.

  • Dr. Q||

    How about taking apart the police state and the prison-industrial complex? No more prohibition, amnesty for all victimless offenders, shut down prisons, no more federal money for SWAT teams, no more asset forfeiture, etc.

  • ||

    Yes let's add the abiity to free victimless offenders and fire abusive police and incarceration officers to the proposed amendment I see above.
    A house of repeal would be a powerful body that could dissasemble the collusive power that has arisen in America and made her a world leader in Govt repression and mob rule.

  • wholesale mbt shoes||

    hello kugou

  • fendi bags||

    And Chad shows his true anti-capitalist colors yet again.

  • ||

    actually, some regulations are essential to prevent corporations from running roughshod over the proletariat class peons in society, murdering them with GMO's, pesticide in their food, rocket fuel in their water.

    to disingenuously lie that ALL regulations are bad, is a corporate shill ploy to make ignoramus' in the general population (a large percentage far as I can tell) just say; "aw shucks, let's just let dem dere corporations do whut dey want!!"

    yeah, right! how'd that work out so far, bozo?

    GULF OIL SPILL, MONSANTO GMO POISON, EPA INACTION AND LYING ABOUT ASBESTOS

  • ||

    Thank you ... God thank you.

    My wife did not believe me until I showed your excellent articles to her!

    I'm not crazy after all.

    Mr. Sun Tuo in the most read book in the world " The Art of War " states:

    ".. an endless war will bring its people to poverty .."

    Washington is the real threat to the roof over our heads, and to our 'security'.

    Thank you!

  • Scarpe Nike||

    is good

  • Jordan Shoes||

    so perfect.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement