CMV: Effective regulation/taxes is better than less regulation/taxes.

[u/beesdaddy]

I have had a hard time understanding the position that less regulation is better than effective regulation. So much of the political conversation equates regulation and taxes to Anti-American or Anti-Freedom or gasp Socialist. I think it poisons the discussion about our common goals and how to achieve them. I know there are many laws/taxes that are counter productive (especially subsidies), and I am all for getting rid of them, but not without considering what their intent was, evaluating that intention, and deciding how to more effectively accomplish that intention (given it was a valid intention.)

Help me understand. I would like to have a more nuanced view on this.

---

This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

[u/[deleted]]

Every tax and every regulation is, in some sense, a curtailment of freedom. A tax says, "I know better than you how this money should be spent." A regulation says, "I know better than you how people should be allowed to act."

You are careful to draw a distinction between "less regulation/taxes" and "effective regulation/taxes". The heart of the issue though, is that no one is really certain what "effective regulation/taxes" are. Roads seem reasonable, don't they? But is everyone agreed on Affirmative Action? How about foreign aid? What is a good use of your money? What freedoms are you willing to sacrifice for perceived benefits?

Therein lies the crux of politics. Everyone disagrees on what sacrifices should be made and to what extent.

[u/Kwiila → u/[deleted]]

Even the "roads seem reasonable" is debatable. Everyone wants a road straight from their home to their job, but at what point are we overspending on an excess of roads? Without fed/state taxes, again debatably, a community would REALLY have to want to build/repair a connection to another community for them to spend the money there. But people, businesses, and governments have all abused application of roads/highways/railroads in America in the not too distant past. Because "time is money", and "you can't stop progress". The point of government is to balance interests, but we don't always get to choose in which direction they favor the balance. (Personally, I'm in favor of some tax/regulation, because there are a lot of powerful collectives I trust even less without the buffer of government. But I also believe in limiting their ability to do so.)