You've gotta be skeptical of an article in the financial press that hearteningly acknowledges the blindingly obvious macroeconomic problems and proceeds to sugg

You've gotta be skeptical of an article in the financial press that hearteningly acknowledges the blindingly obvious macroeconomic problems and proceeds to suggest the solution is some kind of reduction of regulation. They didn't even offer a single convincing mechanism by way of example. I am 100% on board with the idea that large companies have captured key agencies. You don't need a scientific study to note the antics of Ajit Pai or the hostile takeover of the CPFB by a guy that just showed up and just sat in an office there until people started doing what he said. However, the idea that somehow cutting regulations will cause monopolies to be less monopolistic is laughable. Look at Uber, the poster child for dysregulation. They openly and actively thwart any kind of rule of law that would constrain them, and they can fund their operations at shocking losses in the mere hope that they can corner the market permanently. Look at the arms manufacturers that openly lament that there isn't enough of a left wing ruckus to scare people into buying more guns. Look at the right wing rebellion in Oregon over a nothing cap-and-trade bill that called for armed militia to protect the interests of oil. When you have money, the fewer constraints you have, the more you can do. It's the golden rule.