Who is in charge? Who allows any one, business or individual to influence them? It can't happen unless gov't allows it. That is the point.
What came first, the chicken or the egg? The horse or the cart? In the US of A, once government was established, and they began to regulate business, their own interests and pets eventually won out, rather than the people's.
Big government only allows for even further control by the interests of those elected and selected to govern.
No, it is bureacratically driven. Those in control have the power. If the govt officials impose regulations, fees, etc. that strangle start ups, it is on them, period. This nonsense of blaming big business for govt officials looking after their own interests, is simply ridiculous. Unless you are claiming they are being blackmailed with more than campaign contributions. That isn't what you are contending, is it?
Businesses haven't. Cities, states and feds have, with their policies, etc. If a business is given free rein, guess who holds those loose reins? Tight reins on smaller businesses? Once again, who is tightening those reins?
Who makes it difficult for businesses to start up and florish? Certainly some business models, or lack thereof, do, but many have the bureaucracy in their way.
Which is a natural condition in a corporatocracy.
Local/State and Federal governments make regulations for the specific purpose to make it impossible to start up and/or compete against corporations. Good God, the entire agribusiness is one big regulation designed by Monsanto executives.
I am contending they are becoming one big family.
Are you aware that the House/Senate made themselves immune from insider trading laws?
Are you aware that, During the Clinton administration, Larry Summers had Clinton push congress to remove the derivative market out of the jurisdiction of the SEC?? And then Summers himself went on to make $millions in the derivative markets...and Oh...Summers was also a key adviser to Obama in two capacities.