...is that I didn't miss that "it's the collusion of big business and the government that is causing the damage". That was my point, at least so I thought.

We've discussed this one before, how you think the corruption is the result of too-big government, while I think it's the result of too-big business. Perhaps we're both right, in that corruption comes from the collusion of big business and big government, and it's irrelevant who started it. Power is a metaphorical mass and the gravitational pull of powerful masses always tends to draw them together. The distinction between public and private power is an entirely artificial one, and somebody who acquires one kind of power will automatically want to acquire the other.

One could argue that at any given level of power, the two loci of power need to be roughly in balance. That would be true if the powers were symmetrical, but they're not. The government is supposed to be accountable to the entire population, not a few powerful players; and those powerful players are nowhere near as constrained by law as those who wield private power. All else being equal, a free and democratic society needs the government to be on the side of the people, not the powerful. Our government was founded specifically to oppose that kind of concentration of power. Is it really any different that that power today comes from concentration of wealth instead of concentration of genes in a monarchic dynasty?

Tell ya what: I'll stand down if you will. That is, if you'll agree to laws that limit the size of corporate entities to a more egalitarian level, say $100 million in revenue, and corporations that reach that level must be split, and antitrust laws are strengthened to block their natural tendency to recoalesce like little Terminator Mk II globs; then I'll agree to proportional constraints on the size of government. Sound fair?

That's certainly more likely to lead to a more level playing field than your desire to just scale back government and leave business a free hand. I see a sports metaphor coming on...

It's the final 30 seconds of the big game, The Power versus The People, and The People have been getting their asses kicked, 97-0; ball's on the The Power one yard line. Suddenly it's announced that the officials have been taking bribes from The Power.

Your solution is to withdraw the refs from the game. How could that result in anything other than the coup de grace for The People?

In fact, isn't that solution the ultimate corruption? That's surrender to The Power, not fairness to The People.