Government Deregulation and Business

Proponents of deregulation consider that regulation of business is costly to consumers even when cautiously constructed by the best of intentions as this tactic adds to the expenses that companies shoulder which is then passed on to consumers. To the degree of increased regulations imposed by the government, the greater proportionate financial burden is consequently incurred by the consumer. In addition, whatever benefit incurred from regulations do not outweigh the costs. Unregulated competition among companies is characteristically healthier as this allows businesses to contain everyday costs in imaginative and adaptable ways and allows for experimentation to discover the methods customers would prefer to pay those costs. Efficient production should be calculated in terms of customer demand, not by means of economic philosophies, or set pricing structures set by the government that only foresee long-term production costs. All regulation can hope to accomplish is to keep consumer prices as low as possible for the consumer, its original intent. In doing this, many times short-term costs are not properly accounted for. The implementation of pricing structures requires a massive amount of information, which, while it may be accurate during the initial study, may vary widely during the term of price fixture. Temporary and fluctuating factors where costs, investment, and demand are rather unpredictable have been problematic for industries that have come under government regulation such as transportation and utility. A marketplace devoid of regulation provides incentive to minimize costs and maximizes investment potential. Price caps. a slightly less intrusive method of regulation is not as cost-effective as having an unlimited positive aspect.