Yes

lol

Well atleast in the US

theres more job openings than job less

wages are rising and will rise more than ever

because employers compete for labour too

but surely in the US a lot of people are constrained to their immediate area for job opportunities, since lot of people cant afford a car

and public transportation in the US i heard is kinda shitty

dude 90% of households owna car

and buses are easy to take

same with metro

And that isn't a problem since most of these jobs are local

idk these issues differ from state to state, some are easier to invest and create business than others

and there are many variables

of course

as a government, let's say a state government, you need a profound knowledge and many studies to be able to determine if more deregulation would lead to more investment, and if the trade off of less workers right for more finantial freedom would be justified

like if the trade off was something like a range of 2-5% more investment but in turn you cut minimum wage by $500 like why would you do that?

in some cases that would just be the equivalent of 2-3 new jobs, and everyone on the minimum wage would be worse off

you gotta balance it out

if you ordered an independent study that told you that investment would stay constant even if you added a labour law to protect workers i'd say thats a good trade off. no harm no foul

"you cut minimum wage by $500 like why would you do that?"

You would probably allow the employees to be paid more

since they save on money

yeah but you can get studies to tell you how likely that would be to happen

you cant assume ceteris paribus every time

It's more of economic theory

When you cut regulations you save the firms money

= economic growth, higher wages, lower unemployment

in theory, ceteris paribus, you would be correct, but in practice often times more regulation doesnt necessarly mean people are worse off than before

It's always like that

regulations don't do anything

it's literally not

apart from raise prices

limit consumer choice

cause high barriers to entry

reduce economic growth and employment

again

you are correct

if you assume **ceteris paribus**

Let me give you an example

ISPs are monopolised you agree?