Economic innovation for a bright new world
SOPA spawns the need for economic reform
This time my response was to an article on Reuters PEHUB titled “SOPA Headed for a makeover”. It clarifies my stance on SOPA, and that we should not rush to regulate before we understand how it ties to our core economic principles. And given that we violate economic freedom all too often, to apply regulations today that depend on such flawed implementation of freedom is bound to do more harm than good.
Here is my response:
Most of us look at this as an Internet problem but it is not. The root problem we need to solve (before we apply lucid regulations) is that we define what economic freedom really means (with or without the internet).It is a myth that free-markets do not require regulations. The implementation of a free-market requires regulations so every participant enjoys the same definition of freedom, and protects other participants using that same definition. Free-markets are not a free-for-all, meaning you are allowed to just do what you want. The way financial systems in violation(!) of free-market principles have been able to run amuck with our economic systems.The implementation of a true free-market system is now, really for the first time, being challenged by the internet as its distribution. And the time has come to shore up our economic definition before we apply it to the internet.I applaud meaningful regulation that secures everyones definition of freedom. But I would suggest to tread very carefully, for I see those who do not understand the basic fundamentals of a free-market implement regulations that throw the economic baby out with the bath water all to frequently.
The full article, including my comment can be found on Reuters’ web site here
.Internet reform is economic reform
I am for the perpetuation of a free-market on the internet, but not if that purported compliance creates a free-for-all that violates free-market principles. It is a myth that free-markets do not require regulations, but those regulations need to be deployed with the proper recognition of what those free-market principles are. The latter is where most regulations fall apart and in turn do more harm than good.
Here is my commentary to Neelie’s blog posted on the European Commission’s website:
The internet for the first time forces countries to adopt a singular economic system across its distribution and that puts enormous pressure on the agreements needed between countries.While on the surface the U.S. proclaims to be in support of free-markets (and I am, living and working there), the implementation of a free-market requires regulations so every participant enjoys the same definition of freedom, and protects other participants using that same definition. Free-markets are not a free-for-all, meaning you are allowed to just do what you want. The way financial systems in violation of free-market principles have been able to run amuck with our economic systems.The implementation of a true free-market system is now, really for the first time, being implemented globally with the internet as its distribution. I applaud Neelie's work to balance the defunct free-for-all with meaningful regulation that secures everyones definition of freedom. But I would suggest to tread carefully, for I see those who do not understand the basic fundamentals of a free-market implement regulations that throw the economic baby out with the bath water all to frequently.
The original article can be found here
.