Economics and Government

Sounds like a great plan, right? Well not really. A much better, and cheaper way to regulate this pollution would be to impose a corrective tax. We can always tax pollution. Once we determine a $T (tax) that is greater than the marginal control costs, polluters (dentists) will regulate their pollution on their own, in order to save money. This way, each polluter will only pollute to the point where the cost of the tax of another unit of pollution is more expensive than the cost of controlling that unit.

Using this method will bring in revenue that can be used to manage the program, and will be able to support the cost of the "tax and pollution police" that will be needed to make sure that each business adheres. While the EPA's suggested method of requiring amalgam separators will loose money through paying to police businesses to make sure they have, maintain, and properly use these devices. Clearly the corrective "pollution" tax would be better, easier, and cheaper to impose.