[rebuild143]

> If opposite was true then there would be never debate about helping bankers after crisis few years back, government shouldn't have power to "help" private investors with taxpayers' money.

Maybe it's not that the government doesn't have power, but more like the government's power has become a tool for the rich and their corporations due to their larger influence.

> Corrupted companies are less effective, they will eventually die.

Why is this true? Anyone could state the opposite without proof: that corrupted companies are more effective and thrive.

> in free market, if you have capital and don't create any goods, but only spend it eventually you have less capital - it's simple math.

It's not like capitalists just sit on their cash and burn it; their capital is in wealth-producing assets. They don't need to create any goods themselves. Their outsized wealth owns things that does that for them.

[bladelessninja2]

> Maybe it's not that the government doesn't have power, but more like the government's power has become a tool for the rich and their corporations due to their larger influence.

That's why you need to reduce government power. Socialism do the opposite.

> Why is this true? Anyone could state the opposite without proof: that corrupted companies are more effective and thrive.

It's the definition of corruption: you gain personal benefits in cost of organization you work in. Why would I prove the definition?

> Their outsized wealth owns things that does that for them.

Yeah... everything just happens on its own. Surely no one ever bankrupted by investing in stocks.