Let me explain.

After going through this report (I don't have any runs that I'm assigned to today, so I needed something to put me asleep at 3:30 in the morning...needless to say it didn't work), the crux of AEG's argument stems from this:

"When businesses are required to undertake certain activities, as is the case under Michigan's item pricing law, they are forced to allocate their resources in ways that they otherwise might not. In many cases this means a preferred use of resources must be foregone. The foregone preferred use, in economics, is referred to as an opportunity cost. Put another way, the requirement to put prices on nearly every retail item results in retailers not having the opportunity to undertake more preferred activities." (Page 18)

Bottom line: Government regulations divert money that entities can spend more efficiently.

So how does this affect our risk-averse Governor?

If he and/or his handlers continue to pursue this issue, people will start to ask: Why are we focusing on addressing regulations and laws that only affect businesses?

Several years ago, Lansing went nuts creating  licensing requirements on a number of professions here in Michigan to generate revenue (I have a few that are up for renewal this year).

If the cost of compliance with the IPL is detrimental to Michigan Businesses, how is that any different than what other regulations from Lansing are doing do to my personal, or anyone else's for that matter, budget?

Another example would be something that affects (mostly) everyone in the state, Michigan's no-fault insurance law. One of the selling points of Michigan's no-fault law was the inclusion of a Catastrophic Claims Fund to pay the medical claims for serious automobile crashes. The problem here is that while the number of serious crashes had gone down over the past decade, the assessment charged for by the MCCA, the agency that oversees the fund, has increased exponentially. Lansing has no real oversight on how the money is spent (think: The Fed).

I haven't even begun to touch other regulations and laws imposed by Lansing, but I think that my point by now is clear.

Instead of Michigan Residents sending money to Lansing for re-certifications, background checks and to well-connected lobbyists, that money would be better used to support local businesses (i.e. make improvements on our homes, more easily purchase items we need or want, go to local restaurants or even pay down debts).