I've seen both good and bad societal outcomes from low barriers to entry. Similarly, I've seen both good and bad societal outcomes from unregulated free markets.
I would argue that there is a distribution of outcomes as well as a distribution of "degrees" of free market possible in real-world markets.
To me, it makes far more sense to look at the outcomes desired by our society and create policy to "force" those outcomes - regardless of the degree of philosophical advocacy for or against "low barriers to entry" or "unregulated free markets". It just makes more sense to focus on the desired outcomes for our society.
I would argue that there is a distribution of outcomes as well as a distribution of "degrees" of free market possible in real-world markets.
To me, it makes far more sense to look at the outcomes desired by our society and create policy to "force" those outcomes - regardless of the degree of philosophical advocacy for or against "low barriers to entry" or "unregulated free markets". It just makes more sense to focus on the desired outcomes for our society.