If you believe in regulation

Doesn't matter who you are regulating

I wouldn't call limited government power regulation, though, it's basically the opposite.

Regulation the government is The same as freeing the market.

Because the government itself is interference on the market.

But you then have to regulate the big guys to prevent them from individual bribing politicians

Nope, imagine no government. Who do you bribe?

See, a free market would have unrestricted donations to politicians

Which part of the market is the government?

Because that pertains of 2 individuals doing things

So if you think we should limit the amount each person could donate, then you do not believe in the free market

Also lobbying is a private business

I'm curious, though, which part of the market government is. Is it the supply? Is it the demand?

You would be regulating lobbying firms

They are the regulators

When you bribe a politician, what are you bribing them to do?

Regulate

you mean interfere?

The bribe politicians to regulate

Yourself?

So in a completely free market

You eventually see regulations everytime

But the government isn't a part of a "completely free market".

If you do not regulate one of the 3 I mentioned before, you will see corruption everytime

And once you regulate 1 of the 3

Corruption cannot exist, if government doesn't exist. By definition.

You have regulated some part of the economy

Not a free market

So, we seem to not only disagree on what a free market is, but also on what government is.

Probably on what corruption is as well.

Pretty sure I was right 40 minutes ago. It's a misunderstanding of systems.

Government does exist in a free market

Because once you go full free market

@RyeNorth, you mentioned earlier that in your nation internet radio is taxed in a way that terrestrial is not. But aren't there levies that work the other way around, too? Costs to lease public airwaves? It sounds like you're challenging government's right to tax rather than necessarily addressing regulation. That's another legitimate debate, but when arguments get conflated it gets confusing to know what point is cleanly being made in a debate.

You will eventually see the rich bribing politicians to regulate

That is the guaranteed corruption of a free market

Do you think it's the role of government to tamper with the market?

I do for some things yes

I see. I don't.

I think they should regulate lobbying

And other things, that make the market