Regulating tech companies has bipartisan support, so it's an easy way for politicians to get things passed that will be popular with their constituents. Unlike

Regulating tech companies has bipartisan support, so it's an easy way for politicians to get things passed that will be popular with their constituents. Unlike other industries, tech companies haven't banded together to create some SuperPAC named something like "American Association of Tech Innovators" to lobby/bribe politicians against regulating. For healthcare, you have the vile "American Hospital Association" and "Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America " goblins trying to block any legislation that will lower healthcare costs at their expense. For housing, the high costs are heavily affected by restrictive local zoning limiting the new supply of housing. The "lobbying" in this case is local NIMBY groups that every state/city has to fight. For education, the high cost of college is due to the fact that the federal government originates/backs the vast majority of student loans. They basically allow colleges to charge whatever they want, pay them up front, and then it's on the federal gov to collect from students afterwards. When they're effectively handing colleges blank checks, no shit they're going to charge the max they can get away with. It's so straightforward and infuriating that this point is rarely ever discussed in the debates around college costs. If these "non-profit" colleges (vast majority are) want access to that vast student loan money, they should have to play ball and only charge what the feds will allow. If they want to charge more, it should be their problem to find a way to get paid.