Do you think government has any business regulating corporations?

Question

Like the FDA making sure food and drug products are safe, the EPA making sure they don't dump their waste in rivers, and the FTC enforcing consumer protection laws?

Or should we let the "invisible hand of capitalism" fix everything?

Answer 1

Of course.

The State Business Corporation Act defines corporate activies and allows corporations to exist. Corporations rely on the Chauncery courts to resolve disputes. Without State definition, there would be no corporations.

Answer 2

There's a fine line between regulation for the benefit of the public good, and interfering. Many industries self regulate above and beyond what the government requires, because they know a. it's good for business to deliver a quality product and have happy workers and b. if they don't the government will REALLY get involved and make a mess.

Answer 3

No corporation has control at all. If they don't want to pay, you're still ALLOWED to get the procedure. You won't go to jail for trying to get it - until Democrats get their way, that is. Under the new bill, the government creates a new bureaucracy in charge of deciding what procedure to ALLOW. I realize YOU don't consider that "control" but 100% of honest people do. Regulation does not equal socialism but centralized CONTROL of that sector of the economy does. The house bill creates what is dishonestly called a public "option" whose AUTHORS say it will force ALL private alternatives out of existance. The senate bill mandates care that will absolutely eliminate choice and force EVERYONE to get exactly the same product. People who call the bill socialism include its WRITERS.

Answer 4

Yes. Corporations are legal entities equal to us. They can sue, and they can be sued as if they were people.

But Corporations have no soul or conscience, and they can't regulate their behavior the way we can. Therefore they have to have at least a general body of principals that apply only to them.

When the economy of Exxon Mobile is bigger than the economy of Venezuela, they could use an overseer to make sure the power isn't abused.

Answer 5

Yes, when corporations cannot regulate themselves and resort to illegal practices, unethical practices, monopolies, and otherwise unscrupulous things in a greedy quest for more and more and more the government must step in to protect the American consumer. It is too bad that such government regulation is even necessary in the first place but it is.

Answer 6

Well it depends on the exact situation, of course, but in general I'd say in general that having the government deeply involved in the economy violates the principles of a free market economy.

That being said -- do we have a free market economy? No. Is an entirely free market desirable? Not really. All things in moderation, my friends.

Answer 7

Regulations protecting the people from exploitation, and the environment from the same, are fine.

It's when the regulations begin to hinder free enterprise, like Hillary thinking she can just TAKE profits from a private oil company, that they become part of the "big brother" syndrome.

Answer 8

No the government doesn't have any business regulating corporations! But as to your examples:
Selling a dangerous drug should lead to lawsuits
Same with dumping waste into rivers

Answer 9

Mahal has it right and I would like to include that Corporations are not patriots or patriotic. They are very self-serving and do not care what happens as long as they make money.

Their god is Wall Street, not the Federal govt, nor the American people.

Answer 10

I think they do but only as a matter of public safety, like with the FDA. Beyond that they should stay out of it