Stefan MolyneuxVerified account

Name one regulation that “enriches society,” and explain how deregulation is the antithesis. I think you’ll find your pattern is a logical fallacy, not Stefan’s.

How about regulating pollution? Imagine no regulation? Understand this point? No you can expand past, 'name one' and think about what can be done now. Like maybe regulating corps out of politics.

Regulating pollution is a form of loss prevention, not enrichment. That requires value added. Regulations do not add value. You’ll find that nearly everyone debating politics wants corporations out of politics. Those “regulations” are not relevant in the capitalism argument.

preventing companies from dumping waste into rivers because it's cheap is good for society, stop splitting hairs. that's regulation and it adds value, not to the company, but to our existence.

“Is good for society” is not enriching it. Your pattern of capitalism suggests a transfer of tangible value between corporations and society based on regulation. Regulating waste is good but regulation that moves and affects markets is bad for everyone.

like regulation that stops banks from taking risky behaviors and doing commercial investing with private funds? That's bad? i don't think you're open enough, or even accepting of larger point since you're splitting hairs, to see that regulation can be good.

If you take one look at who and why that happened, you condescension toward Republicans is mute.

clintons had a lot to do with it as well. i was a bernie bro in the last campaign. But again, you're trying to swing to a point that doesn't matter. do you see how regulations can be good? or are you still on with the nonsense of 'all regulations are bad'.