Externality Mitigation
| Certain aspects of our economy are currently illegal or curtailed by regulations. They are trying to prohibit an activity that does harm. Often these regulations or prohibitions do more harm than good. The crime surrounding the evasion of the laws begin to affect others. |  |
 | When people break these laws, they bring negative consequences to society at large. There are two common ways to deal with these issues, to prohibit or to allow. However, Haley2024 proposes a third way. Businesses could open up a wide variety of methods to deal with this issue. All companies wanting to do an activity that harms people that are not doing that activity or the general public needs to have a specific rating on externality mitigation. |
| First, Competitive Regulatory Agencies and the Rating System would need to be in place. The claim and evidence need to be submitted to the Rating System, that actions are harming the people in the transaction or society at large. If the evidence is strong enough, people or businesses doing the transactions would have to pay for mitigation. |  |
 | Whether it is side effects of drugs, pollution, gambling, drinking, extreme sports, among others with negative externalities, programs would need to be funded such as A.A., gamblers anonymous, detox centers, or a medical fund to deal with injuries resulting from the risky activity. Each CRA would have to increase funding until a particular rating was achieved, thus motivating CRA’s to be very effective. |
| Pollution and the environment can be more complicated, thus not conducive to government regulatory control. Manufacturing, farming among other businesses all have adverse side effects on the environment. The balance of whether it is ‘worth it’ is very subjective. Having food, manufactured goods among others enrich our lives considerably, however, have an effect. |  |
 | Competing Rating Agencies will look at EPA issues VERY differently. Everyone must put their trust, thus their power in a Rating Agency. The combined ratings will be influential in the marketplace because people will shun low EPA rated products. However, there would still need to be a fund for negative externality mitigation with low rated businesses paying higher amounts. This fund would help clean up the environment. |
| This rating would be very dynamic because it is challenging to determined counterfactuals in an ever-changing landscape. Governments could set different ratings; however, realizing too high of a Rating Floor could become counterproductive. Many states would experiment with varying levels of mandated rating levels, and that would be rated as well. |  |
 | Many who drink or do drugs, desire to alter their mood and feel ‘light headed and forgetful’ as to take away their emotional pain. Right or wrong, the desire is there, and laws do not stop this activity. Currently, the FDA does not allow drugs just for this purpose. |
| With the demand for mind-altering drugs so common, there would be many businesses who would compete in creating a particular drug that achieves the desired effects with the lowest adverse side effects possible and without addictions. The competition would allow for safer drugs to emerge. |  |
 | However, a fund will be set up to treat people who are harmed. The lowest rated businesses will have to pay larger percentages. Gambling, pornography, prostitution, among others would all fall under CRA’s and would need high ratings of mitigating negative externalities. |
