No it is not.
That's corparatism enabled by regulatory regimes that limit the market's ability to self regulate.
Discussion
So what regulation enabled this and how self regulation, if that is posdible, would avoid that.
Corporatism... yes, why not...
The Healthcare system in nearly every country is overly regulated. Any regulatory regime allows for larger companies with either enough cash on hand to hire lawyers or those with political pull over the regulators or politicians to have unfair advantages over other companies.
The root problem, as with most things, it's an issue with fiat and the governments that issue it. 🤷♂️
Well no, i think it is the opposite. Larger companies exist and play unfair, exacly because no regulation stopped them. Big corporates evolved by lack of regulations, then they created theirs to impose them on us. Big corporations did not pre-existed.
Also in many countries there is not much private sector in healthcare. Don't judge healthcare by USA. For example in my country, the vast majority of problems in healthcare, comes admittevely by the effort to insert the private sector in healthcare.
Also...
Well no, i think it is the opposite. Larger companies exist and play unfair, exacly because no regulation stopped them.
No. Mega corporations currently only exist because of regulatory capture and political maneuvering to get that big. They are different from a "natural monopoly" that can come into existence in a new market segment or by new invention/process/production. Also, just to note, not all monopolies are big. This happens quite often in very niche products or services. So, I'm not generally anti-monopoly.
The whole point of regulatory capture is to AVOID competition. The math works out for some companies to dump millions or billions into pushing for a system that only they can navigate with an army of lawyers. This doesn't just happen in the US.
Looking at Healthcare in the US is actually a very good example: look at the results of the ACA. We have less doctors, worse health outcomes, much poorer treatment, and, insultingly, much higher prices for all that awful BS. This is exactly an example of what I'm referring to.
Trying to force private health care into a state run system isn't the church way to "fix" the whole system. You must tear it all down and live with some chaos until the people who will pay for services and the service providers come to agreements on what things should cost, as in, letting a free market work to: improve quality, reduce costs, eliminate waste, and cater to customer needs.
You're assuming that all actors start out equal in the market and then one captures regulators and then captures the market, but it's often the case that the actors don't start out even.
Actors can bring in winnings or other advantages from a different market.
If that's what it seems, then I didn't explain it thoroughly enough, as I don't believe anyone is equal at all in all things because that's just not true in many ways.
Currently yes. Regulations benefit the oligarchs. That's because they make them. They will still be benefited by the lack of them because they have already gained a lot. That's what Stella says... So when you ask free market you play their game. We have to make the rules, not them.
As for the healthcare, i think you are wrong. That's because healthcare was fine in general, until corruption brought and continues to try to bring the private sector to healthcare, every time with downgrading effects for healthcare. We don't want more private sector in healthcare, we want less because itnis better this way.