>This statement sort of clearly false and hyperbolic. Why would you make it?
Name a publicly traded for-profit corporation that exists to serve the public.
At best it's a disregard for the public. You can see it in non-political stories on HN. What percentage of companies have been meaningfully punished by a data breach?
>This is a pretty clear sign to me that you don't understand the argument in question.
I very specifically meant "unfettered free market capitalism" and I could have been more clear. It's the end result of many more popular policies seeking to strip regulations for the sake of making things "more efficient". The fight is obviously about the extent of regulatory removal but "removal of all regulations" is an idea seriously proposed by many. I don't see how our current system needs fewer regulations, especially at a time when corporations are growing through mergers and acquisitions, data is collected and shared more widely, and therefore fewer companies have the ability to affect more individuals.
Name a publicly traded for-profit corporation that exists to serve the public.
At best it's a disregard for the public. You can see it in non-political stories on HN. What percentage of companies have been meaningfully punished by a data breach?
>This is a pretty clear sign to me that you don't understand the argument in question.
I very specifically meant "unfettered free market capitalism" and I could have been more clear. It's the end result of many more popular policies seeking to strip regulations for the sake of making things "more efficient". The fight is obviously about the extent of regulatory removal but "removal of all regulations" is an idea seriously proposed by many. I don't see how our current system needs fewer regulations, especially at a time when corporations are growing through mergers and acquisitions, data is collected and shared more widely, and therefore fewer companies have the ability to affect more individuals.
Look at a sibling comment to yours: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18685351
>Consumers will obviously avoid J&J baby powder products and switch to a competitor’s baby powder product.
This is exactly the sort of case where the "invisible hand" has failed. Sometimes it's invisible because it's not there.