Empower the Consumer via Transparency
The role of government intervention into the operations of businesses is always a heavily debated topic. To what right does, and to what extent shoud, the government get involved in the free market capitalistic business environment that we have built?
As someone who claims to be a consumer advocate, I’m not sure of the best approach here. Let’s take an issue that has become very significant over the past few years…enviromentalism. Some may say that the government needs to create laws that require companies to follow a minimum of standards regarding their environmental impact. This would be great for us consumers because we would be assured that the products we buy are meeting a certain quality standard. On the other hand, more government regulation means more expenses for the business (usually) which would trickle down to the consumer in the form of more expensive products. Where is the balance between what improvements I, the consumer, am willing to pay for and what I am not? And is the consumer trustworthy enough to make this decision?
The biggest problem is not the questions I just posed, but the fact that we have no measurement tools to find the answer. The current strategy is to have environmental groups lobby large corporations to change, and through the fear of bad PR, corporations start changing. I think that if this issue, or any issue, is seen as largely important to the people of this country, than the government should get involved. Not to regulate operations, but to regulate transparency. I believe that government’s role in major social issues like this (global warming, obesity, etc…) is not to tell businesses how to act, but to require businesses to be transparent about their operations.
What if the government required that every product made must have a sticker that gives a number of that product’s carbon footprint on a regulated scale of 0 - 100. Companies wouldn’t have to change their operations (other than changing their label). Consumers would then be able to use their money to determine how important this issue is to them. The free market would stay as it is. There would just be another attribute of the product that the consumer would need to evaluate. We should have a slew of scales based on important social issues. In other words, government shouldn’t hinder businesses. They should empower consumers.
[polldaddy poll=1056197]
I would make the comparison of companies that have to get approval through the Underwriter’s Laboratory (UL). The have to pay for the inspection process (test, or whatever method for approval from UL) and they have are able to place the UL approval on there product, pamphlets, etc. What’s your opinion on that, since it considers inspection, approval, and a visual to consumers.
From what I understand, I think it’s good thing. But the UL certification is just a standard to meet to get the certification seal. There isn’t a rating scale based on how good or bad something is. So the attribute people are looking as it whether seal is there or not. That is a safety thing. I think for larger social issues, we need rating scales so we can evaluate products based on how much they affect these issues.