Scientism

[Eric the Green]

(07-09-2019, 10:23 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I've never argued that there should be no government in the mix.  Government is needed to adjudicate contracts, for example.

The tendency to oligopoly is, however, a result of putting the government in the mix.  Government regulation provides an avenue for business success other than free market competition - namely, lobbying for regulation that will help particular companies, usually the incumbents, against competitors.

Since government inevitably sides with existing companies due to lobbying, some countervailing efforts to prevent existing companies from getting too big is necessary.

Yes, we need that, and we need very much to revive the idea that government regulation to restrict bad behavior by big business is needed too. That means putting liberals instead of conservatives and "neo-liberals" in office. Because a conservative is susceptible to lobbying for regulation that helps business or the particular company in his district or a business that pays his campaign contributions or for his lobbyist, while a liberal (though he may also be lobbied and contributed to by business for these reasons) also wants regulation to not only keep competition in the free market open, but to make sure that what companies do is what is best and not worst for consumers, workers, the environment, and the safety of the economy from unwise speculation, and provide for the safety of the people from the effects of business bad behavior (welfare, social security, medicare for all, etc.). And a liberal rather than a conservative wants and votes for our elections to be free from the influence of big money, gerrymandering, lobbying, vote suppression, manipulation by other countries, war contracting, the electoral college, etc. so that government reflects the will of the people, more than the will of the wealthy special big business interests that it reflects today under our conservative rulers.