Posted on 12/30/2024 8:12:10 AM PST by MtnClimber
An Auburn University study says every single regulator destroys fully 138 private sector jobs every year you keep him on the job.
With nearly 300,000 federal regulators, the shock is that we still have any jobs at all.
The Two Scariest Words in the English Language
A lot of the excitement around the Department of Government Efficiency — DOGE — focuses on the dollars saved. But more important is all the things the federal government destroys with those dollars.
Specifically, the millions of jobs destroyed by the two scariest words in the English language: federal regulators.
A few weeks ago I mentioned how DOGE under Elon and Vivek is taking aim at the regulatory mothership that strangles the American economy and fuels the totalitarian administrative state — you may remember it from Covid.
A mother ship that is oddly enough unconstitutional according to a pair of recent Supreme Court decisions — Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo and West Virginia v EPA.
I asserted this could unleash the economy like nothing we’ve seen in the past century.
And the reason is because it’s hard to overstate just how destructive regulations are.
Every Regulator Destroys 138 Jobs
One 2017 study by the Phoenix Center and Auburn University found that every single full-time regulator destroys [138] jobs.
GDP-adjusted to today, that translates to $16.5 million of economic output. For a hundred-thousand dollar bureaucrat.
This lost output is made of jobs and businesses that were never started. Or were stunted by strangling regulations — which are generally bought by big corporations specifically to strangle small competitors.
Along with mom and pops chased into bankruptcy as collateral damage to new regulations — say, a diner forced to spend $30,000 on a low-energy exhaust fan.
So it’s not the bureaucrat’s hundred thousand salary that matters. It’s the 138 jobs he takes out. Every single year you keep him around.
In fact, you could fire him, keep paying him for life, and still put a hundred families in the middle class.
In recent videos I’ve mentioned research saying one dollar in taxes destroys 3 dollars in GDP. A regulator blows that out of the water — each dollar in regulator salary destory 112 dollars in output.
Given there’s roughly 288,000 full-time federal employees involved in regulatory activities, that implies an annual cost of regulation of around $5 trillion. One-fifth of our entire economy.
This means DOGE slashing tens of thousands of regulations could spark Morning in America even if we keep every last one of them on the payroll.
The Top 3 Regulatory Offenders
The worst 3 regulatory offenders are the EPA, which prey especially on small businesses least able to afford their never-ending mandates.
Second is securities mandates — namely Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley — that have all but closed public markets to start-ups and shelter banks and insurers from competition.
And labor regulations — namely FLRA, NLRB, an alphabet soup including Obamacare mandates and occupational licensing. There are brutal for small businesses that might take a gamble on marginal workers but are locked in.
And they raise the cost of hiring to the point that companies downsize or move to China to survive.
Of course, these are just the start. The regulatory code has grown like a monster for a hundred years in literally every domain you can imagine, from braiding hair to collecting rainwater on your property to giving health advice — which is illegal unless you’re a doctor.
And, my personal favorite, the regulatory mandate to literally add poison — ethanol — to any alcohol that’s not taxed, including mouthwash. In case you thought the federal government would never poison you on purpose....SNIP
I hope Elon and Vivek look into the cost of the regulatory state.
An Auburn University study says every single regulator destroys fully 138 private sector jobs every year you keep him on the job.
With nearly 300,000 federal regulators, the shock is that we still have any jobs at all.
The issues is private or government.
Drive along American highways and notice thousands of abandoned gas stations.
That was the work of the EPA. Thousands of independent gas stations went out of business because of EPA mandates.
And big businesses love rules that kill the competition.
Yes, and in this manner the federal government supports monopolies.
Correct me if I’m wrong, Doesn’t our Constitution say that only the legislature can make our laws and not a ravenous pack of unionized executive bureaucrats?
Let your inbox stack increase over the next few days. I tell you when to resume normal work.
Everyone did as they were told. About three days later, there was a "surprise" visit by the GAO. Their visit was to assess whether more staff were needed, which they assume were since the administrator pointed to the overflowing inboxes stating that the "workload was overbearing".
My friend said you learn quickly that your status in DC depends on how many workers you control. Since there's no reward to being efficient, you concentrate on increasing staff.
The agency was the EPA, which now employs 16,204 people. And, with Congress ignoring their responsibility of Congressional oversite, the EPA continues to issue more new regulations all the time without check causing it to grow even larger. This is a double-whammy since you pay the salaries for the new people and for the increased cost of producing things.
Doesn't our Constitution say that only the legislature can make our laws and not a ravenous pack of unionized executive bureaucrats?
The Legislature creates the laws, the Executive enforces the laws. The problem is that Congress can and does delegate limited rule-making authority to the Executive branch agencies, so Congress can look at the "big picture" while the bureaucrats craft the rules to implement the intent of Congress' broad strokes.
Statute is codified in the United States Code (USC); the bureaucrats develop rules that are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Proposed additions to the CFR are published in the Federal Register; members of the public can then respond to any Notice of Proposed Rule-making. The bureaucrats have to consider all contributions before finalizing any new rule, modification to a rule, or elimination of a rule.
All according to Hoyle. Congress can rein in the bureaucrats if it wants to, especially when Congress thinks the Executive went too far -- Congress can amend the statutes controlling the agencies. And the Courts also make decisions on whether rule-making is constitutional, and formed according to the agency's rules and overall statutes covering rule-making.
Now, aren't you sorry you asked?
“We’ve got to pass it to see what’s in it.”
Only 38? Slackers!
Jobs given out to H-1b visa holders?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.