Are socially harmful widespread practices caused by market failure, or by bad government regulations? This article argues that "market failure" is usually caused by bad regulations, and often that is true. But what causes those bad regulations, and why don't we change them?

Why, for instance, doesn't the US regulate the emissions of SUVs and pickup trucks like cars? Environmentalists have pressed for this, but they have been rebuffed by the US government.

That is lobbying at work. Any bad regulations in the market tends to benefit some companies, and they will spend part of the benefits to lobby to maintain the regulations that benefit them.

Most economic policy choices are not between a "free" market and a nonfree one. A market requires rules; the question is, which rules will it have? And how are they to be chosen?

In a democratic country, those rules are decided democratically. In a flawed democracy such as the US, they are decided by contention between democracy and lobbying. Almost every bad regulation is protected by lobbying, so fixing it requires a battle.

That's why I support election of progressive officials, such as Senator Sanders and Representative Pressley, who will be eager to go against the lobbyists and fix the bad regulations and laws.

*Human "behavioural crisis" at root of climate breakdown, say scientists.*

*[They propose] that climate breakdown is a symptom of ecological overshoot, which in turn is caused by the deliberate exploitation of human [behavioral engineering]. Unless demand for resources is reduced, many other innovations are just a [band-aid].*

Climate defenders called on the US Department of Agriculture to take account of the contribution to global heating of meat and dairy production.

*European politicians weaken climate policies amid farmer protests.*

It's much more comfortable in the short term not to bother preparing to keep climate disaster small enough to survive it. But it is foolish in the long term.

Climate defenders were prosecuted for continuing a nonviolent protest in London after being ordered to stop. The case was dismissed on the grounds that the order was not communicated to them properly.

That was the right result, but the reason for it means that human rights are not safe in the UK. In effect, this judge turned this case into a warning shot.