Are regulations conservative or liberal in value?

They are non-libertarian. That is to say that libertarians support maximization of liberty (essentially the right of an individual to participate in activity undesired by the group or refuse participation in activity desired by the group).

Libertarians generally oppose social regulation and market regulation.

Conservatives generally support social regulation but not market regulation; believing it is a proper role of government to induce/enforce moral behavior but believing market forces to be intrinsic (i.e. all modification will have unintended market consequences/ tradeoffs) and that regulation often acts as a drag on economic growth; they believe the trade-off is usually net-negative.

Liberals generally support market regulation and oppose social regulation; they tend to moral relativism (morality is defined by social groups and is fluid- rather than a fixed concept or a deity) and tend to believe the marketplace contains some intrinsic unfairness and harmful tendencies (in addition to the good it provides [as most liberals believe]) that can be mitigated by regulation and that the trade-off of regulations is usually net-positive.

In recent years “deregulation” has been a buzzword of conservatives, but this is fairly generationally specific. In the near term past we might reasonably conclude however that “regulations” in general refer to a more liberal tilt.

Define regulations.

Social regulations? Laws of behavior? Traditional? Most things like murder, theft, or destruction of property fall into the category of standard human morality, be that drawn from nature or from God.

Economic regulations tend to fall on the left, or the liberal side. Conservatives tend to want economic freedom. Conservatives sees business as an exercise of freedom. So in an economic sense regulations are more liberal in value. In the the same sense, conservatives like social regulations such as laws against abortion, or maintenance of gun rights, while liberals tend to want the opposite.

I believe though that this question is being asked over the wrong axis of the political spectrum, to give a big picture answer, regulations are innate from the upper left corner and total freedom is innate to the bottom right corner.

So you can see that conservatism and liberalism both tend toward regulations, they’re just in the middle of two extremes. Perhaps this is a better midline to draw:

In short:

Social regulation: conservative

Economic regulation: liberal

Regulations that protect the public safety, including protecting ordinary citizens from the excesses of corporations, should never be considered conservative or liberal they should just be Common F*****g Sense.

For example, as this article shows, there is a certain demarcation line of homes in Southern Florida. That line being homes built before Hurricane Andrew in 1989 and those after. Those built after were built with more stringent standards, and most of those survived the recent hurricanes to hit the area. Many of those blown away were pre-Andrew.

That’s the sort of thing Good Regulations do: they protect people and their property.

Because I guarantee you, Hurricane Irma did not stop to ask anyone in its path whether they were conservative or liberal.

Regulations are typically a more liberal ideology, as traditionally the Conservative party believes in less government involvement. It also depends on what types of regulations you are talking about, because that also brings in a different factor. Liberals believe that regulation is needed in order to sustain a well-run society, and one that provides opportunities to all. On the opposing side, conservatives believe that regulations actually hinder growth in society, and keep citizens from achieving potential within said society.

For example: Liberals believe the best economic system is highly regulated by the government, and that the government knows what is in the best interest of citizens . Conversely, Conservatives believe that the best economic system is the free market system, which allows for competition and private enterprise to determine what is in the best interest of citizens.

Ideally, neither. Regulations are like a referee to ensure a safe and fair competition. A referee shouldn’t favor one player over another. A referee should fight against bias and partiality and just enforce the rules we’ve all agreed upon. It’s up to the community at large to update and improve the agreed upon rules (or regulations) as time passes.

Both democrats and republicans want regulations in U.S.. Republicans want to regulate drugs, democrats want to regulate arms (so police can more readily shoot black people) democrats want higher taxes, republicans want higher hidden taxes to find their military expansionism. Democrats and republicans both want licensing to create market cartels like the current health care and lawyer cartels for example. Democrats want to regulate how businesses are run and republicans want to regulate how business are run by regulating competion and artificially lowering it for Americans, through immigration raids. I could go on and on but really democrats and republicans both want to regulate things. Their differences aren’t entirely superficial but they largely are.

Also I’m assuming you’re considering this is in he context of the U.S., if so democrats aren’t liberal. The liberal party of the U.S. is the libertarian party. Liberal in most parts of the world and it’s original meaning means socially and economically liberal, or not wanting govt regulataion but having self created decentralized market regulations (market forces) instead.

If the regulations limit the right of women to use birth control or to get an abortion, they are conservative in in value.

If the regulations are intended to ensure that people are free to discriminate against those who are are are LGBT, they are conservative in value.

If the regulations limit the right of banks and other financial institutions to rob you blind, they are liberal in value.

If the regulations seek to ensure that the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the food you eat are all healthy, they are liberal in value.

If they are protecting invididual rights and freedoms, expanding access, promoting justice and equality, and/or working for the people who need help, they are probably liberal.

If they are protecting those who don’t need help (corporations, the 1%), helping them to exploit people with less power, limiting personal choices, and/or mandating specific religious beliefs, they are probably conservative.

Are regulations conservative or liberal in value?

Behind most regulations are some dead bodies – regulations force us to do things properly even if it is inconvenient

So as David Brown said regulations are Common Sense

There are regulations that are “Regulatory Capture” where the regulation is actually designed to maintain some sort of monopoly – these are pernicious

Not only do they cause injury but they also undermine actual proper regulations

The USA is more susceptible to this type of regulation due the stupid idea that speech is money and cannot be regulated

It depends on what you’re regulating. If you’re regulating a woman’s uterus, or who you marry or what you smoke then it’s a conservative value. If you’re regulating how much toxic waste a company can dump into your water supply then it’s a liberal value.

Liberals regulate giant companies and leave individuals alone.
Conservatives regulate individuals and leave giant companies alone.

As of late, the left stands for more government control in our lives, and the right stands for more of a free market.

There are exceptions of course, some being marriage and abortion.

The left and right will always rally against each others actions, because the other side is doing it, not because of the action itself. “It’s only ok when we do it!”

Depends who’s being regulated. If business is being regulated, it’s liberal. If YOU are being regulated, its conservative