Government and Business
Over the last 100 years, the issue of government regulation has been increasingly brought to the forefront. Part of the reason for this, is because there has been a need for various laws to be enacted to protect the safety and interests of the general public. However, due to the fact that United States is a capitalist-based economy, means that there have been calls to limit the kinds of regulations that are imposed on businesses. The reason why, is because many pro-business advocates will argue that this can stifle innovation and progress. As firms are forced to worry about how to comply with outdated laws, that are hurting their ability to compete in the global marketplace. During the last three decades, this has led to a reduction or elimination of those laws that are coming into conflict with the interest of business.
At which point, many of the politicians revised how various regulations are enforced (through having a more liberal interpretation of the law). This is when a company will have the ability to: increase their profit margins and they can start hiring once again. A good example of this can be seen with Ronald Regan saying how the government overregulated business during the 1980 election. As he felt, that if you can reduce the number of restrictions on businesses that this will improve their ability to compete (which will lead to an improvement in economic activity). This is exactly what happened in the early 1980's when his administration reduced a host of: financial, safety and environmental regulations. This helped the economy to improve with the unemployment rate dropping over the course of 8 years (Miroff, 2009, pp. 34 -- 35).
However, many critics will claim that these kinds of actions will often lead to an increase in the kinds of risks that firms are taking. Once this occurs, is when they will argue that this can lead to increased amounts of threats that will have a negative impact on everyone. Once this takes place, it means that there will be long periods of stagflation. Evidence of this can be seen with the recent financial crisis and the elimination of the Glass Steagall Act in 1999. At the time, many banks claimed that this was an out of date law that prohibited their ability to compete. The reason why, is because it forbids financial institutions from becoming involved in a host of activities at the same time to include: banking, insurance, financial planning and brokerage services. This made it difficult for American companies to compete against foreign firms that were not limited by these laws. Once the act was repealed, banks became large conglomerates that sold a variety of products. In 2007, the lack of oversight increased the risks to the financial system with many banks becoming too big to fail. This is significant, because it is showing the continuous debate about how much regulation in necessary of businesses. To determine this we will examine: the current relationship between the government / private firms, a public policy goal of citizens, the value of these laws to consumers, if corporations have political strategies and what recommendations could be used to reduce these risks. Together, these different elements will provide the greatest insights as to the role regulations play in the relationship between government and businesses (Bonnick, 2010, pp. 5 -- 10).
Describe the current relationship between government and business in the United States.
The current relationship between the government and business is one of increasing regulations. Where, a series of different laws are being enacted to protect the interests of the general public. This is because there has been an outcry about how the lack of oversight is contributing to abuses of system during the recent financial crisis. While at the same time, various firms have been pushing to limit the language and policies about how these laws are being enforced.
A good example of this can be seen with the Dodd Frank Act. In the aftermath of the financial crisis,...
This is accomplished by creating a super regulator known as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. They have the power to regulate the size of banks and they can determine what kinds of policies will apply to consumers. This is significant, because it is showing how there is an emphasis on increasing the overall amounts of regulations of businesses ("Dodd Frank," 2011).
However, many firms have been focused on lobbying government officials to water down these guidelines. The reason why, is because they believe that strict interpretations of the law could hurt their ability to compete. If this were to occur, it could mean less financial products will be available to the general public. As a result, the government has been taking an approach by: seeking the comments from consumer advocates and businesses. This means that they are trying to create regulations that will: improve the overall amounts of protections and allow firms to more effectively compete in the markets ("Dodd Frank," 2011).
Describe one public policy goal of the United States for its citizens.
One policy goal of the United States is for the citizens to be able to feel that corporations are providing them with the best products and services. This means that executives must be engaging in actions that will help to protect the interest of the public. While at the same time, they are able to increase their overall profit margins. This is significant, because it is highlighting the role of the government with the kind of laws that have been enacted. As, they want to ensure that consumers are safeguarded against possible abuses based upon: their policies and the way they are enforced. This will create an environment of having businesses provide customers with the goods and services they demand. Whilst ensuring, that these firms are not taking advantage of their customers or the general public.
Evaluate the value of governmental regulation for American consumers.
The value of governmental regulation, is that is protects consumers against receiving products / services that are considered to be unsafe or of poor quality. What happens is all businesses are focused on increasing their profit margin. The problem is that during the process is when they will cut costs as much as possible. This means that anything that could increase these figures or slowdown production is often discouraged. If there are no regulations in place, this means that there is: a lack of quality and safety controls in place. The government prevents this by creating minimum standards that must be followed. Then, they conduct investigations and enforce various provisions of the law. This will ensure that all businesses are following the safest practices by providing consumers with something that will not harm them and is of high quality.
State whether corporations should have political strategies or not.
Corporations do have political strategies. The reason why, is because this helps them to have an influence over: how laws are enacted and ensure that any kind of enforcement will take their views into account. Once this occurs, it creates a situation where these regulations will not hurt a firm's ability to provide various products and services to customers ("Ranked Sectors," 2001).
A good example of this can be seen with the use of lobbyists by private corporations. As, number of different sectors has been spending from: $336 million to $4 billion every year on these activities. A few the largest industries that have been involved with these organizations include: finance, insurance, real estate, communications, electronics, transportation, defense, construction, health care, trial lawyers and agriculture. These elements are important, because they are showing how there a number of corporations that will use lobbying as a part of their overall strategy ("Ranked Sectors,"…
