Warning: "continue" targeting switch is equivalent to "break". Did you mean to use "continue 2"? in /homepages/43/d388007368/htdocs/zaxecivobuny/wp-includes/pomo/plural-forms.php on line 210
New Anti-Lead Law Designed to Help the Poor Will Definitely Hurt the Poor | I like koalas.
browser icon
You are using an insecure version of your web browser. Please update your browser!
Using an outdated browser makes your computer unsafe. For a safer, faster, more enjoyable user experience, please update your browser today or try a newer browser.

New Anti-Lead Law Designed to Help the Poor Will Definitely Hurt the Poor

Posted by on January 8, 2009

[This post was originally written for my employer’s blog, Show-Me Daily.]

There’s a Post-Dispatch article that’s really worth a read. It briefly describes, then goes on the illustrate the impact of, a new federal law aimed at protecting children from dangerous lead levels in clothing and other products sold to children 12 and under. And, make no mistake, lead is very dangerous.

The economics of this are worth considering. It represents a restriction on supply that will raise costs for producers, thus raising prices for consumers. Are the costs worth the benefits? Ostensibly, the people currently buying clothes for their children from risky businesses are the people most in need of protection, because they can’t afford to shop at more reputable dealers and almost certainly can’t afford to comparison shop for the least risky low-end retailer.

However, this is not a case of “society bears the cost to help the less well-off.” The increased cost will be born quite directly by the people buying the clothes. If the manufacturer or retailer must perform expensive testing to comply with federal standards, the cost will surely be passed along to the consumers. As mentioned in the article and here, this could even lead to secondhand stores throwing away large amounts of merchandise, or even closing entirely.

For the record, the biggest risk of lead poisoning for children is probably not their toys and clothes. Frankly, this all seems to me a bit reminiscent of my helmet law post. Namely, lawmakers impose a rule, gleefully ignorant of cost/benefit analysis, and secure in the knowledge that everyone will agree: The Children Must Be Protected.

One Response to New Anti-Lead Law Designed to Help the Poor Will Definitely Hurt the Poor

  1. vroman

    theres a reason so many old homes used lead based paint. its a superior product. it lasts forever. there are egyptian statues that still have recognizable patches of lead paint on them. latex paint only lasts 5-10yrs. if a professional paint job costs say $2k, then you are saving a substantial amount of money using lead paint in the long haul. if the health risks are minimal (ie not everyone who grew up in a painted house prior to 1980 is retarded) the cost/benefit almost certainly comes out in favor of lead paint. the cost/benefit of govt is severely negative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *