Regulation is itself neither objective nor fair. Additionally, regulation is not immune from market pressures as the legal environments and incentives they create are also subject to competition. No nation-state has a monopoly on hospitable business environments.
Fairness at its most objective is merely a process. It's not and should not be proselytized as a guarantee of equal outcomes irrespective of circumstances.
> Or is there possibly a level of “fairness” that’s evident to the average person?
The "average person" does not exist and thus doesn't have an opinion representative of an arbitrary individual or group of individuals. A rational flesh-and-blood person can only speak for himself.
>Fairness at its most objective is merely a process.
so basically, you don't care about moral fairness and are fine letting monopolies rule markets and societies. The extreme side of "equal opportunity".
I won't make a moral argument here, but merely a logistical one: country governments have a lot of incentive to not let this happen. For the sake of technological progress, for the sake of ensuring the non-upper class economy (aka, taxable income that won't play Matrix with them in terms of evasion) is healthy enough, and for the sake of minimizing risks of a hostile takeover (be it from the monopoly or foreign powers).
So a truly "free market" only works in a vacuum with benevolant dictators and a united world government. That may take a while.
>The "average person" does not exist
hence why we have multiple fields dedicated to approximating such a person. Because averages are still valuable for many things. From government policy, to targeted marketing, to identifying societal biases.
Oh god how tiresome these libertarians can get. Particularly when they've let their brains be turned into mush by reading too much Ayn Rand, or Mises et al. Hope you grow out of it.
Fairness at its most objective is merely a process. It's not and should not be proselytized as a guarantee of equal outcomes irrespective of circumstances.
> Or is there possibly a level of “fairness” that’s evident to the average person?
The "average person" does not exist and thus doesn't have an opinion representative of an arbitrary individual or group of individuals. A rational flesh-and-blood person can only speak for himself.