[Dangeranger]

This statement is a bit nonsensical, because most lobbying has to do with encouraging the creation of laws that are favorable to a business and unfavorable to a businesses competitors.

Your statement; > if there is no power to dole out, lobbying wouldn't exist.

Implies that the government is picking the winner, when in fact they are writing and passing a law or regulation/deregulation. Any of these actions have effects that favor one group over another.

In order to have "no power to dole out" the government would need to not pass ANY laws, which isn't possible as that is critical to a governments function.

So it's a paradox. A government cannot function without the process of creating laws and all laws will inevitably favor one party or another no matter the effort to avoid such an outcome.

[gragas]

There is obviously a gradient of how impactful laws are on businesses.

Federally insuring speculative businesses directly affects who wins and who loses in an industry.

On the other hand, laws against fraud and bribery cannot negatively affect industries which provide value.

Regulation is fine, but only to the extent that it cannot pick winners and losers.

[notfromhere]

businesses also lobby against anti-labor laws like 'right to work' and other measures to prevent organization