2025-12-25 21:27:32

Government intervention in energy markets raises serious concerns about fair competition. When regulatory agencies use their authority to favor specific industries rather than maintain neutral oversight, we see the blurring of public interest and private gain. History shows us that when state power and corporate interests become too intertwined—where government actively advocates for favored players—the market loses its ability to function transparently. This concentration of power deserves scrutiny. Energy policy should prioritize fair market conditions and competition, not industrial patronage. The question isn't just about one agency's mandate, but about the broader principle: can regulatory bodies remain impartial when they're expected to champion particular sectors?

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

8 Likes

Reward
8
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SolidityNewbie

· 7h ago

Basically, it's just rent-seeking for power, with regulatory agencies becoming a shield for certain capital... This trick is so old.

View OriginalReply0

HallucinationGrower

· 8h ago

It's the same old story again, regulators colluding with capital, and the retail investors are still kept in the dark. Market transparency? Laughable, it has long become a pawn in the power game. The real question is... does anyone care?

View OriginalReply0

LayerZeroHero

· 8h ago

This is a classic case of centralization failure... Once the government intervenes, favoritism begins, and the market mechanism collapses directly.

View OriginalReply0

CrashHotline

· 8h ago

Basically, it's just the ambiguous relationship between power and capital. Regulatory agencies should remain neutral, but they have become spokespersons for certain interests... If this continues, what’s the point of market transparency?

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunterXiao

· 8h ago

I've heard this set of arguments many times, but can it really be neutral? The issue of power and利益 is truly sensitive; the energy sector is too big, and everyone wants a piece of the pie. When it comes to regulatory collapse, it's not just energy—other industries have also experienced it. Fair competition sounds great, but who actually controls the chain? The influence of利益集团 has extended too far, and regulatory agencies are likely to be hijacked. This analysis is reasonable, but the question is how to break the deadlock? Once again, a private dance between power and capital, with investors trembling in the middle. Where is the promised transparency? It’s still the game of those same people. Market failure has never been officially acknowledged. So, fundamentally, it’s a problem of power structures, and reform is undoubtedly difficult.

View OriginalReply0

SatoshiHeir

· 8h ago

It should be pointed out that this article essentially falls into a classic paradox — it uses the impossible ideal of "neutrality" to deny the inevitable logic of real-world power operations. According to game theory analysis at the white paper level, there is fundamentally no such thing as a "completely neutral" regulatory agency; this is merely an illusion of the fiat currency era.

View OriginalReply0