[FREEDOM] How Regulation Kills - A Swedish Example

in #anarchy8 years ago (edited)

An American acquaintance of mine asked me what kind of regulations we have on businesses in Sweden. A simpler question to answer would perhaps be what's not regulated in Sweden? 

Every day entrepreneurs, creators and ordinary people are prevented from realizing their dreams. For example a while ago an age limit on tanning salon's was implemented by the gov. I happen to know someone in the business, and their staff costs will soar since every customer now must show their ID before being allowed to enter the establishment. He estimated that the age limit will cost him about 750'000 kronor each year (around 87000 dollars), which is plenty for a small business owner. There are of course many similar examples, and it's having extremely limiting effects. People simply don't dare or find any joy in starting up businesses anymore.

Everyone knows that it can be harmful with excessive solarium exposure. At the same time, each individual must be free to make their own choices. Or do you suggest we should regulate sunbathing at beaches, cliffs and balconies also?

The consequence is a quite dull society where choices are made for us by others and where development is halted. Early last year the Environment and Health Committee handed over a proposal to the Swedish Government on age limits for tanning salon's. Classical liberals voted against the Board's proposal to introduce an 18-year age limit and to impose stricter controls.

It may seem a small matter. However, it's fundamentally important. People must be allowed to decide for themselves. Politicians can't and shouldn't be allowed to infringe on the freedom of individuals every time they so wish. Even less so in matters where those concerned are only at risk of harming themselves. In the case with tanning salon's there are already regulations that obliges the establishment to provide good information about risks; all customers thus have every opportunity to make an informed choice.

In addition, the proposal threatens a large number of small entrepreneurs. Even today, the entrepreneurs of Sweden are weighed down by plethora of cumbersome and questionable rules and regulations. Overall the regulatory burden is completely unreasonable. The consequence is that Sweden has disproportionately few small-sized businesses. Small businesses can't expand or succeed in our strict system.

Every tanning salon across the country are threatened by the requirement of an 18-year limit. Staff costs will soar if every customer must show ID. At a time when unemployment is one of our biggest sources of concern, government must instead stop preventing them from growing.

Sure, excessive solarium use can cause dangerous skin cancer, but so can an excessive exposure to our very ordinary sun. In fact, there's no huge difference in terms of health hazard. Maybe we should have the government flying spy drones over beaches, cliffs and swimming pools to ensure that we aren't exposing ourselves to danger? I think most of us would find that idea absurd, but this is where we will end up if we follow the will of the regulatory obsessed political class to its very end.

I am quite convinced that people would be more than able to take self-responsibility - voluntarily - without a nanny state constantly standing over us like an overprotective parent. These natural tendencies are actually only hindered and stifled currently. The fact that we are denied the chance to show that we can triumph beyond statism and regulations probably only has a debilitating impacts on us.

Sort:  

I feel like this is the end result of all government. They promise you a system that will secure you, in exchange for extracting all your wealth of labor and time and then restrict you for revenue generation in order to fund the oh so many workers needed to make sure you aren't breaking regulation.

It's a sick circle and it will never work long-term.

Large corporations with friends in government are behind the plethora of regulations that penalize small business because those are their up-and-coming competitors. I worry that we use the metaphor of a nanny state and the idea gets lost that these aren't do-gooders in government just trying to protect us. They're corporate sharks trying to hurt other businesses. People who welcome the idea of a nanny state might actually start to wake up and protest if they saw the nanny state for what it really was: a bunch of corporate sharks.

And that's a regulation , but in real life you know what's going on for real . I can go to arab shop and buy tobacco under shelf . I can buy beer without goin outside to Systembolaget. A lot of things happening under the curtain . Some owners in industry hiring people on black , i know them . So regulations are one but real situation is another .

I assume a solarium is a tanning parlor?

I don't know, I don't necessarily agree on the legislation... but in the US people aren't considered adults, or capable of making their own decisions, until they are 18. So, whatever... the point is that if a single piece of legislation is bad, that's all it means. It does not prove the idea of regulation is bad.

Also, we have a similar restriction for tattoo parlors here in the US... yet we have tons of them. It really doesn't seem to be a barrier to people who want to run tattoo parlors.

This post has been linked to from another place on Steem.

Learn more about linkback bot v0.3

Upvote if you want the bot to continue posting linkbacks for your posts. Flag if otherwise. Built by @ontofractal

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.17
TRX 0.15
JST 0.028
BTC 60157.20
ETH 2416.98
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.43