There are so many assumption baked into your comment and most of them, I would say, don't hold up.

Let's start with the biggest one which is that measures (let's say regulations) aimed at A (let's say megacorps) have their intended effect on A and most significantly on A.

In reality, the most influential and profitable companies will always have an easier way through whatever you throw at the sector then smaller, less profitable companies. The megacorps may even welcome / shape the regulation such that it harms their competitors that don't happen to have 30 lawyers on the payroll anyways.

I didn't say anything about a conspiracy or even forethought. It's simple incentives and power dynamics. Imagine Lagarde or Powell saying "oops, we shouldn't have printed a gazillion billion dollars, after all so please fire me and Paul Krugman and all the other state-aligned Neo-Keynesians and put Peter Schiff in charge to dismantle the ECB/FED and replace it with free market money". Absurd. Much easier to opportunistically try to pivot this into more state control on the back of inflamed public opinion.

Time for a non-destructive world-wide robin-hood revolution? That would be great but if it sounds too good to be true...