What are the results of regulation in a mixed-market economy? Answer; regulated goods and services to create value, which are acceptable by consumers in the market. Also, the results of regulation in a mixed-market economy is; more regulation (compulsions to provide services) lowers costs and increases production, which increase consumer welfare, and therefore profits.

In a perfect mixed-market economy, there is full employment and inflation are at the level that consumers can afford. There are no price changes in regulated goods and services, and competition among suppliers keeps costs down. The end result? The results of regulation in a mixed-market economy; less regulation equals lower costs, higher profits, and increased freedom for consumers.

Why would consumers be interested in any of these results of regulation in a mixed-market economy?

Answers; lower prices, increased savings, increased consumer welfare, and increased competitiveness. When businesses compete to produce regulated products, they will attempt to create better products, which are more profitable, at less regulation, by using less-regulated resources. What is the use of key words, if we are trying to regulate out competition? We will never succeed, because markets are self-correcting.

So, if regulation creates the results of regulation in a mixed-market economy, why do we need government regulation?

Answer; because we know that it makes things better for consumers. If consumers feel that they are getting a better deal than is necessary, they will tell other people. Individuals become entrepreneurs and compete to offer the best deal possible. Eventually, something works out and consumers get what they want.

So, is it wrong to argue that consumers demand the results of government regulation?

Again, no. But, consumers don’t always know where their money is really going. It may go to corporate headquarters, but it may also end up in the hands of investors, bankers, and loan officers. That’s why it is important for government to step in and ensure fair play. Otherwise, everyone stands to lose.

If we want to get the results of government regulation right, we need to understand that consumers set the standard for what is good for consumers. If the standard is low, bad business practices will result. However, if the standard is high, consumers will receive what they bargained for.

In other words, we are not just dealing with a mixed-market problem

We are dealing with a government intervention into the free market that is trying to achieve some desirable results. Those desired results are obviously good for consumers. However, when government gets involved and attempts to regulate a sector of the economy, it inevitably creates winners and losers. This creates a dilemma for politicians and judges who have to make decisions based on what is “just” for the average person.

There’s nothing wrong with consumers demanding a better deal. The real problem arises when a politician or judge tries to enforce a certain law or regulation despite the fact that the law may not serve the public interest in the way that consumers demand. Ultimately, we may be seeing results of regulation in a mixed-market economy where the government attempts to intervene in a free market only to make things worse for everyone. If you’re going to base your argument against government regulation, it makes sense to look at the results of regulation in a mixed-market economy. In my opinion, you are making a mistake.

If you believe that consumers in a free-market system are in charge of their economic interests, you must also believe that businesses exist to serve the public interest

Obviously, there are some exceptions but the truth is that businesses exist to make money. Therefore, they will sometimes attempt to get a government regulator to interfere in the business of the business and create results of regulation in a mixed-market economy.

I think this is unfortunate because most economists would agree with this view. They would also agree that results of regulation in a mixed-market economy are actually good for the economy as a whole. The reason why is because consumers demand certain services and goods and businesses need customers in order to make a profit. That means that when consumers demand certain services and goods, businesses and manufacturers will either provide them or get ready to launch new products so they can take advantage of consumers’ increased demand. Without consumers to absorb the profits from these new products, the new products or launches won’t be successful and therefore it’s bad for business.

However, if consumers in a free-market system want to demand certain services and products, they can do so. That’s where the problems begin because, if consumers don’t buy enough products or services, the businesses and manufacturers will suffer and they will no longer be in business to make those products or services. This causes them to cut their service or product offering short, and consumers feel the pinch when they are “caught out” by this. The result of results of regulation in a mixed-market economy is still beneficial for the overall economy. That’s because consumers demand goods and services and businesses have to cater to their needs in order to survive in a mixed-market economy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *