The Cost of Safety Regulations
Safety regulations rely on marginal analysis, whereby the cost-benefit analysis dictates the scope of implemented safety measures. Regulations exist everywhere; from highways to hospitals to airports to oceans; regulations are the barriers of jurisdiction that define the actions of its operators. Regulations mustn’t be arbitrarily imposed, rather formulated as remedies to encountered problems in everyday life. Regular assessment must occur in order preclude an excess of regulatory oversight or an overabundance of safety units. Marginal costs are an essential aspect of safety regulations, as they dictate the feasibility of enhancing safety benefits.
Marginal Benefits are “additional benefits associated with one more unit of a good or action; the change in total benefits due to the addition of one more unit of production,” (Miller, R., p. 229). Marginal Costs are “changes in total costs due to a change in one unit of production,” (Miller, R., p. 229). Black’s Law Dictionary defines the term Marginal Costs as “[t]he additional cost incurred in the production of one more unit of output,” (Garner, B., p. 436). One example, the cost of adding 57 extra seatbelts to every seat within a vehicle greatly outweighs its benefit. But the benefits of adding one seatbelt to every seat greatly surpass the costs. Therefore, seatbelts are an instrumental safety measure in compliance with the law and the preclusion of lawsuits.
Thus, a cost-benefit-analysis must be conducted to ensure that an economically efficient level of safety is achieved. Black’s Law Dictionary defines the term Cost-Benefit-Analysis as “[a]n analytical technique that weighs the costs of a proposed decision, holding, or project against the expected advantages, economic or otherwise; a way of calculating the methods or plans that will bring the most advantages for the smallest cost, esp. in business,” (Garner, B., p. 437). Similarly, Bryan Garner defines Cost-Effective-Analysis as “[a] method of weighing the worth of an activity or project that might gain or has gained political or corporate approval,” adding its “assessment turning on the known or projected costs as against benefits that often cannot be measured directly in monetary terms,” (Garner, B., p. 437). Bouvier Law Dictionary defines the term Marginal Analysis as “[t]he study of the degree to which a gain is offset by a burden,” (Sheppard, S., p. 367). As Roger Miller notes “[t]he relevant question is not whether safety is good or bad; rather, it is how much safety we want—which can only be answered by looking at the added (marginal) benefits of more safety compared to the added (marginal) costs,” (Miller, R., p. 7).
Economic Efficiency. The justification for product safety regulations must be determined by its economic efficient level of safety. Miller writes that the “[t]he economically efficient level of safety occurs when the marginal cost of increasing safety just equals the marginal benefit of that increased safety,” (Miller, R., p. 18). Black’s Law Dictionary defines the word efficacy “[t]he power to make an intended result occur; the capacity to produce effects,” (Garner, B., p. 652). As Economist Henry Hazlitt notes “[p]rices are fixed through the relationship of supply and demand and in turn affect supply and demand. When people want more of an article, they offer more for it. The price goes up. This increases the profits of those who make the article, (Hazlitt, H., pp. 105, 106). Concisely, “if the marginal benefits of adding (or keeping) a safety feature exceed the marginal costs of doing so, that feature is worthwhile. If added benefits of a safety device do not exceed the costs, we should refrain from installing the device,” (Miller, J., p. 18).
The Ineffectiveness of Regulations. Regulations might not produce safer, healthier lives, should government impose an overabundance of regulatory oversight. A limited government is conducive to producing a sustainable free-market. Product safety regulations needn’t be exclusive to government. Agencies and administrations must consider the cost of lawsuits and regulatory violations should they operate outside their limited jurisdiction.
Similarly, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is a compromised criminal cabal that has begun to allow major pharmaceutical operate autonomously under specific circumstances; inadvertently enriching both entities financially, whilst beginning a trend of temporarily suspended the Constitution in favor of government action. The government and its bureaucracy has made it clear, they hate the American citizen and want them to suffer, while funding the entire process of dehumanization. Historically, self-imposed rulers believed they amassed power through imposing mass regulations and conducting blood sacrifice rituals. This barrier of regulation forced a permanent state of fear.
Regulations cost money. In contemporary polity, this practice still occurs, under different circumstances. Rather than overt human sacrifice to appease demonic entities, the ruling class now creates broad regulations, allowing major pharmaceutical companies to inoculate the public with experimental poison substances; whilst cutting corners financially and buying ingredients from foreign nations. These ingredients are created in unregulated environments, leading to toxic results that end up being purchased at bottom-dollar prices by American corporations and pharmaceutical manufacturing organizations. As Rosemary Gibson, Senior Program Officer at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation writes, “[e]ven if the agency knew the names and addresses of the companies making drugs and ingredients for Americans, it couldn't inspect them. Congress apparently didn't give it the money,” (Gibson, R., p. 42). Worse, U.S. “[c]ompanies were ‘misinformed about the identity of the manufacturing site of 39 percent of the drug substances they purchase from China,’ said Philippe Andre, who audited Chinese manufacturers at the request of European and American pharmaceutical companies,” (Gibson, R., p. 44).
This, combined with mass regulations continues the practice of sacrifice; directly against the clearly stated intentions of God. One factor that did not exist in prehistoric times were zealous lawyers, armed with jurisprudence and protected by the supremacy of an objective Constitution. Thus, in a Republic the lawsuit is the greatest civic weapon against the tyrannical regime striving to depose the American citizenry to compliance subjects. Rather than rely on the government to protect every individual from radical pharmaceutical extremists testing experimental technology on children whilst working overtime to exterminate as many individuals as possible. This is not just antivaccine rhetoric, but objective horror. Whilst unregulated Pfizer tested experimental mRNA concoctions on 2,268 children until they were able to classify it as “safe and effective,” (BusinessWire; JMBK). This disgusting human sacrifice is only one sick example of the Leviathan’s exploitation of loose regulations. At the end of the day, sick people make more customers for the major pharmaceutical institutions. The government has greenlit the pathway for medical tyranny and the introduction of untested experimental concoctions to be injected into Americans.
The PREP Act is another instance of egregious regulatory oversight, whereby the PREP Act was enacted on December 30, 2005, addressing “liability immunity . . . [and] create[d] a compensation program,” (FederalRegister). No matter its acronym, the act is crafted to invoke immunity from liability barring anyone injured from their medical concoctions or contraptions from taking legal action.
Conversely, regulations are essential assurances against poisons; when it comes to natural vitamins and minerals. A survey of pharmaceutical manufacturing reveals that “[w]hatever medicine you take, be assured that the US drug supply is among the safest in the world. Hundreds of thousands of people . . . remind each other that the products they make might be for their children, parents, or themselves,” (Gibson, R., p. 234). Individuals working at companies that understand their actions contribute to the safety or hazards of any substance are likely to need less legal regulation and authoritative oversight.
Legal Zealous Representation
Thus, it remains to obligation of lawyers to disembowel the Leviathan—for attorneys bear the power to stand up for every citizen, and ensure that no entity may infringe on the inherent liberties granted by God. Government regulations allow the government to curate law in a language that can be reinterpreted (by that same government) to suit their interests above the factual basis of reality. These neglect consideration of the citizenry and the infrastructure of their communities, in favor of furthering government agenda. But lawyers reside in the shadows, cogent in law and ready for battle. Moreover, lawyers are human beings, and the government is not. Attorneys who represent an individual’s safety will lead by example, in that “[t]hey will know that I am the LORD, when I break the bars of their yoke and rescue them from the hands of those who enslaved them. They will no longer be plundered by the nations, nor will wild animals devour them. They will live in safety, and no one will make them afraid, (Ezekiel 34:27-28; NIV). Thus, the Justice System bears the capacity to compensate for the lack of personability.
While there are conditions that require institutions to produce specific medical devices or substances; the American medical establishment has simultaneously curated a plethora of new diseases by tampering with the food and water. This is why the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is placed in control of both of these commodities. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. writes that “[t]he FDA receives 45 percent of its budget from the pharmaceutical industry,” thus must cater to its agenda, (Kennedy, Jr., R., p. 26). No entity should ever be tasked with regulating food and pharmaceutical drugs. But the government believes this is the best method of policy; alongside their advocation for modern U.S. immigration policy.
Robert Reich, Labor Secretary under President Clinton, spoke on National Public Radio in 1995, stating “that regulatory agencies across the board are understaffed and have had their budgets ‘whacked’” while "many of them are in the pockets of the very companies and industries they are supposed to regulate. It is the wrong time to shield industry from lawsuits when the FDA is failing in its core mission to protect consumers from harm," (NCBI). Reich added that "[y]ou can't have it both ways . . . [e]ither regulatory agencies have to be made tougher and more independent, and given the resources they need to protect the public, or we've got to rely on courts and private lawsuits to make sure companies have every financial incentive to protect the public," (NCBI).
During the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic, major pharmaceutical companies were temporally untethered from regulation. For the first time in modern American history, U.S. citizens were tyrannized by the medical establishment, whereby citizens were forcibly vaccinated to gain access to public resources or enter public buildings, including grocery stores. The New World Order metastasized before the eyes of every citizen within a major city. Living in New York City, the residents witnessed the exodus of small businesses and closures of religious institutions including churches. This is what regulations prevent. But one must consider the source of the regulations. If the Leviathan creates law, so can it redact it. Thus lawyers are dutied by God to uphold the image of His Kingdom. Attorneys must bear the torch of His natural law, acting themselves as regulatory authorities.
Americans and their families are under attack from drug manufacturers. It is regulations that provide total immunity from liability as medical institutions formulate and test new concoctions and contraptions. Yet there may be regulations that other companies owned by these same individuals responsible for these major pharmaceutical manufacturers may have broken. Therefore lawyers must go on the offense, and impose white-hat lawfare against organizations of tyranny, on behalf of the aggrieved. By bringing the regulatory battle to their doorstep, the operators within the Leviathan can reign back their encroachment, by reducing the effectiveness of regulations through civic oversight. The three branches of government remain divided, as their power is diffused—so has the government applied this formula to its constituency, dividing the people with rhetoric and media. The intentional division of the citizenry injects coercive authority into the regulatory power of the Establishment.
Conclusion
In sum, in some capacities regulations are essential to safety; in others, they are excessive—even detrimental—to the citizenry. Thus, a marginal analysis must be conducted to produce economic effectiveness. While regulations are intended for good, they can quickly become officious. Therefore, institutions, companies, and the citizenry needn't rely purely on government regulatory oversight without first considering the jurisdiction of attorneys and the cases that can be brought against these violative agencies; whilst crafting laws ex ante, therefore ensuring the posterity of man will not encounter these same conflicts. Regulations concurrent in power with natural law will likely be correlative to an economic efficient level of safety. Thus, some regulations are justified, benevolent to communities and the individual; while others remain temporarily tethered to culture, invoking a high propensity for short-term expiry. Less regulations produce a demand for more individual responsibility and self-regulation.
Bibliography
BusinessWire. (Accessed on October 30th, 2024). Pfizer and BioNTech Announce Positive Topline Results From Pivotal Trial of COVID-19 Vaccine in Children 5 to 11 Years. Business Wire. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210920005452/en/
FederalRegister. (Accessed on October 30th, 2024). Eleventh Amendment to Declaration Under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act for Medical Countermeasures Against COVID-19. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/12/2023-10216/eleventh-amendment-to-declaration-under-the-public-readiness-and-emergency-preparedness-act-for.
Garner, B.A. (2021). Black's Law Dictionary, Eleventh Edition. St. Paul, MN: Thomson Reuters.
Gibson, R., et al. (2018). China Rx: Exposing the Risks of America's Dependence on China for Medicine. Prometheus.
Hazlitt, H. (1946, 1962, 1979). Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics. Crown.
JMBK. (Accessed on October 30th, 2024). Pfizer Tests Vaccine on 2,268 Children – @JMBK.NEWS. https://jmbk.news/2021/09/20/pfizer-tests-vaccine-on-2268-children/
Kennedy Jr., R. (2021, 2022). Limited Boxed Set: The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health. (Children’s Health Defense) Skyhorse Publishing.
NCBI. (Accessed on October 30th, 2024). US Bill to Shield Drug Companies from Product Liability. PMC. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC543897/.