US consumer protection law is actually fairly feeble compared to, say, the EU equivalents, generally (for a particularly dramatic example see treatment of EULAs and similar). The US does seem keen on making regulations terribly _complex_, but not particularly strong.
The occasional, feeble, rarely enforced speed bumps that we occasionally throw up around some largely performative ideal that working people shouldn’t just get constantly ripped off via structural advantage for self-styled job creators almost always lead to temporary increases in broad based prosperity as judged by honest and humane notions of the common good for Res Publica. A limited but meaningful subset of the population was seeing substantial increases in prosperity in the post war period of comparatively high taxation and comparatively high regulation. It sucks that we didn’t extend those benefits to minorities, that was a glaring flaw, but that was fixable without throwing the whole thing out and handing the reins over to Art Laffer and Milton Friedman and other goblins like that.
This is a culture so extreme around its idea of private property and private enterprise that treating human beings as property is a habit of thought as a culture we just can’t seem to quit in spite of a bloody, declared civil war and a thousand violent skirmishes that don’t quite qualify as wars.
We’re now deep into a regression on this that has the typical person struggling via a combination of monopoly and monopsony pricing power enabled by blank check lobbyism that creates de facto indentured status for anyone with a kid who needs medication.
Low effort quips from people who haven’t felt cold or hunger or illness recently enough to remember are a serious part of the problem.
Alas, the straw man you argue against doesn't exist. (Though my adopted homeland of Singapore probably comes closer than the so called Land of the Free.)
Remember: even Bill Gates had to fight for a decade or so to get his favourite car imported. And that was when he was the richest guy on the planet. Bloomberg and Romney lost their bids for the presidency against much poorer opponents with less support from the rich. You guys still have minimum wage laws on the books, too. Rent control and price controls ('anti-price gouging laws') are ever popular. To name just a few examples.
> This is a culture so extreme around its idea of private property and private enterprise that treating human beings as property is a habit of thought as a culture we just can’t seem to quit in spite of a bloody, declared civil war and a thousand violent skirmishes that don’t quite qualify as wars.
Please don't brand Milton Friedman as some kind of slavery advocate.
> Low effort quips from people who haven’t felt cold or hunger or illness recently enough to remember are a serious part of the problem.
I don't think they make much of a difference on way or another. But you are right, that thanks to relatively freer markets, more and more people can enjoy the ignorance of bliss of not knowing what hunger feels like. That's how progress looks like.
It is beyond dispute that liberalizing the markets in a society is an almost guaranteed way to lift a society out of a confused manufacturing sector and into a much better organized manufacturing sector: markets are a much better way to price cars and consumer electronics than planning committee guesses. No one disputes that other than Jensen Huang.
But using a log scale and a ruler to apologize for flagrant grift is nothing to do with capitalism, markets, democracy, common sense, or humanity.
Rent seeking is the original sin of capitalism: don’t take my word for it, re-read your Adam Smith and pay attention this time.
And if by “you guys” you mean advocates for the broader public?
