I had a good time reading your essay prompt. You went to great lengths to provide opinions, and I appreciate that. These readings have ample opportunity to provide insight, so I thought I should mention my appreciation.
I agree with your quote here:
'Government regulations can be lethal to an entrepreneur, argues Bylund when he claims "For example, regulations aimed at protecting consumers may actually harm them by reducing competition and increasing prices" (Bylund, 2016, p. 18). This quote emphasizes the idea that regulations can have unintended negative consequences on consumers, such as reducing competition and increasing prices. A perfect example of this is the argument to increase the minimum wage. Increasing the minimum wage may seem like a great idea on the surface, yet, in practice, only benefits the largest corporations that can afford it. The small businesses with minimal budgets are left to cut their already little labor force and lose money to pay for basic things to get done.'
I believe Bylund was not being so one way or the other about this, but I do agree that he was trying to clue us into the unintended consequences of regulations. I read it less like regulation is bad and more like it is hard to predict as an economic driver. Your mentioning of the minimum wage is a good one, but I think that also highlights further that it is less of a "good or bad" issue and more of a general "too much or too little" governmental reach and how messy that could be.
Sure, I agree that raising the minimum wage at the federal level could be problematic, but we live in the U.S. Where individual states can adopt their own minimum wage. I am not claiming that as a solution. Instead, I am pointing it out to show that even between federal and state regulations, there can be a bigger mess regarding the unintended consequences of said regulations. What happens when 5 neighboring states all have disproportionate pay gaps?
Never mind the other potential issues: pay, labor force retention, profit, etc. Ultimately, I think it serves us well as entrepreneurs to be aware of regulations and their potential impact. I do not think it is for us to outright claim good or bad; this is something important to us to keep in mind. To put it simply, knowing how to play a sport is not the same as knowing how to run a sport.
Further on, you get Tamny. I found Tamny really refreshing and relevant. Tamny kind of touches on the points I mentioned when you summarize him.
“Tamny argues that stable money is not necessarily synonymous with sound monetary policy. He contends that the focus on stable money is misguided, as stability does not necessarily lead to economic growth. Instead, Tamny believes that a better measure of sound monetary policy is the ability of individuals and businesses to make long-term plans and investments. Tamny also argues that inflation is not always harmful, and can in fact be beneficial in certain circumstances. He points out that inflation can help to reduce debt burdens, and can incentivize individuals and businesses to invest in productive assets. “
I found this ridiculously accurate to our current day. Maybe because this book is pretty contemporary. I am of the Tamny school of thought; there may be ways for us to take advantage of the regulations in ways that truly benefit us. If we strip away money from the equation, we are left with raw trade. In raw trade, the more sound the trade policy, the more likely you are to thrive long-term. If we subscribe to the notion that money does not change the nature of trade, then having a sound monetary policy is synonymous with having a sound trade policy, and the importance of having one never went away. I believe Tamny is appealing to an individualistic perspective here, as being an individual entrepreneur places the onus of dealing with financial holes on you.
In this sense, I agree with the final Tamny summary.
“Tamny's argument that stable money is necessary for businesses to make long-term investments is valid in this regard. When the value of money is unstable, it can be challenging to make accurate predictions about future revenues and expenses.”
Furthermore, I agree with your closing statements:
“Bylund's arguments highlight the importance of free market principles and the dangers of market distortion caused by regulations, while Rand and Tamny's arguments emphasize the importance of stable money for long-term planning and investment. By understanding these issues, we can make informed decisions and navigate the challenges of the market successfully, rather than ‘hoping’ for a stroke of luck or favorable monetary policy.”
I think, whether you agree with them or not, staying in tune with these issues is imperative for a successful entrepreneur. Again, I enjoyed reading your work, specifically the number of opinions. Some essays tend to be really limited in that regard. Good work!
RE: Inflation Widens the Inequality Gap