Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,642 posts)
Mon Jun 26, 2017, 09:07 PM Jun 2017

Deregulating the economy isn't fiscally conservative if the regulation is saving money

Nathan Bryant, Contributor at Business Insider

http://www.businessinsider.com/deregulating-the-economy-isnt-always-fiscally-conservative-2017-6

"SNIP................


Clocking in at 2,300 pages, Dodd-Frank is a gargantuan law — aside from its hundreds of new rules, it created a dizzying web of authorities, boards, bureaus, councils, and offices to oversee the financial system. And on top of the 2,300 pages of the law itself, Dodd-Frank has given rise to an additional 22,000 pages of agency-issued regulations. Overall, Dodd-Frank has cost the economy an estimated $36 billion since its implementation.

But Republicans must not be overzealous, either. Aggressive deregulation may produce a short-term economic boom, but politicians must also give thought to the long-term consequences.

In fact, a long-term approach is an essential part of true fiscal conservatism. Literally, the word “conserve” means to save resources. And to effectively save resources, one must obviously consider policies from a holistic perspective. A certain economic policy may have impressive short-term benefits, but if eventually results in some massive expense, it does not ultimately save resources — all of the policy's previous, short-term benefits are more than canceled out. Thus, the policy would not be fiscally conservative.

When this holistic principle is applied, regulations are seen in a rather different light. Dodd-Frank has cost the economy $36 billion, but this pales in comparison to the staggering costs of the Great Recession. According to the Dallas Fed's more conservative estimates, the Great Recession cost the economy $6 trillion to $14 trillion. The highest cost estimate in that report was $30 trillion. So if financial regulations do actually prevent another major financial crisis, they will save the economy trillions in the long run. It would literally take hundreds — or even thousands — of years before the costs of effective financial regulations exceeded their benefits.


..................SNIP"

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Deregulating the economy isn't fiscally conservative if the regulation is saving money (Original Post) applegrove Jun 2017 OP
Unregulated capitalism cannot succeed. elleng Jun 2017 #1
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Deregulating the economy ...