Regulations can hinder economic growth by forcing companies to spend more time (and money) in an attempt to adhere to the rules; time workers could have spent producing output. However, economists have determined that rules that apply to a few firms have a smaller, negative impact on economic growth than rules that are broader. Why might a stringent rule that induces a few firms to reduce production be less likely to reduce the economic growth rate than a less stringent but broader regulation that causes all industries to cut their production?