In the U.A.E. we were the least-regulated environment in the region, and over time we are seeing more and more regulation coming in. On the other hand, a central bank can overregulate and choke the economy, and then we will have a dead banking industry.
Banks are concerned the central bank is imposing too many regulations. If the trend continues, we'll swing to heavy regulation. We need to have balanced regulation to encourage the economy.
I personally believe that any country that has a nuclear program should conform to international regulations and should have international regulatory bodies that check to make sure that any nuclear program moves in the right direction.
All's the government should do is keep the taxes and regulations at a manageable rate, keep a decent standing army and get out of the way.
With the derivatives market larger than ever, we need way more regulation of Wall Street, not less.
It's one thing to change regulations on the city level, another on the state, and still another on the federal. The higher the levels are, the more difficult change gets.
A corollary is that, when laws are out of touch with the people, those laws can and should be changed - from the most simple local regulations to the highest law of the land, our federal Constitution.
What is responsible for the phenomenal development of the Internet? Well, it certainly wasn't heavy-handed government regulation.
Some claim that the Obama FCC's regulations are necessary to protect Internet openness. History proves this assertion false. We had a free and open Internet prior to 2015, and we will have a free and open Internet once these regulations are repealed.
Incumbents have long promoted regulation in the name of protecting consumers when their actual goal is to block new entrants and stifle competition.
