Question

1. What are the positive and negative effects of government legislation/regulation? Assume that a given regulation was needed and implemented, what method would you propose for removing that regulation from the books when the need had passed? (how would you stop the pendulum from staying too far in the other direction?)

Answer 1

Govt. regulation, is one of the necessary evils prevailing in society, which is needed for regulation but can be out of control if given too much powers and legislation. There is no scale to compare, how much is too much. The biggest irony of human efforts is, you only get to know if decision was worth while in the long run.

The regulations made are multidimensional. Some are for improving the conditions of people in power, some with an intention to bring equity amongst the people, some to break the social barriers, some to improve life style and condition, the list goes on. Role of a govt. is not limited to cabins, they impact the life of people at a power, no other profession can. In view of giving such mighty powers in the hands of some couple of people, the powers are tried to be kept in check.

Talking about negative and positive effect of decisions made by the govt, this can be understood better with and example. India is country where social class divide is very prominent, For years people of lower class are exploited by so called upper class, where the position, future, employbility , everythging is dependent on accident of birth. The discrimination follows with an inhuman practice of untouchability. To mark an end to it, the constitution makers put forward the idea of reservation, where the cutoff of qualification was much lower for such deprived class, helping them come up and forward economically and improve their social status. Over 70 years have passed but this regulation is not over ruled even with the flaws. The pro argument is addressing the untouched section of the deprived class, and the against argument is questioning the whole output and results , which are not great over the years. THe govt. chooses to ignore the against argument, on grounds of capturing the vote bank off people especially the vulnerable class.

What must be done to stop the pendulum from staying too far in the other direction, the question ask, well in this scenario it could be clause of timeline about how long a law can survive. The revival of laws are demanded, the impact of previous laws must be accessed. THis should be done on stats and facts and not on belief. And lastly, what majority of people want must be a consideration in the decision.

The points added are not ultimate and vary from situation to situation eg. gender rights is somethings which is dealth with diferent proximities on different levels and cultures. No one solution is valid for every difficult situation. But one thing which is constent is the intent of making people equal in both socal and economic paramters, improving the living condition of everyone, and welcoming new ideas for growth.