The intriguing part of this article are the implicit assumptions.Here's my [DZ's] small truth: Regulators and politicians have one answer for success "give us more money") and one answer for failure ("give us more money").
An economist who could speak the truth effectively might be a big plus.
- Companies are bad
- Government must protect workers
- Government though hated for incompetence is the answer to disasters
- Government must get bigger
- Government (executive, legislative) is not to blame for any disasters
- Penalizing oil companies has no effect on consumers or on the amount of oil imported
- There is always an appropriate scape goat for a disaster.
- The scape goat is not the government
- The scape goat is a company, preferably a foreign company
- Bad legislation is not the culprit even if the company followed the legislation and the legislation was not sufficient
- The answer to all disasters is more government funding and employees
- Increased oversight costs in the government has no effect on the health of the economy or on America's world wide competitiveness.
I have one answer for them: Do your job first. If you don't, we take your money.
Bottom Line: There needs to be penalty for a failure of businesses AND government. (Remember who really has market power here. It's not the company, it's the government with a monopoly on the use of force.)