How exactly is any startup, small business owner or individual supposed to compete without strict regulation?
Well, they just provide a better product or a better price on their own. If they can't do that, then there's no need for a "small business owner or individual" to be attempting to enter that market, as Amazon must be doing a better job. If you're worried about a natural monopoly, then take a look at the two monopoly chapters in The Machinery of Freedom, and that will put your fears to rest. In short, any attempt to abuse market power will lead to Amazon being uncompetitive in the market -- which will eventually lead to its downfall. In the meantime, let's enjoy cheap products.
So, what's your point?
Is it that we should have a more educated populace? Public schools in the United States have been failures, even though Since World War II, inflation-adjusted spending per student in American public schools has increased by 663 percent. Obviously, more money isn't going to help, and that's all I hear from people who make claims like "It's the dummies."
Here's the real issue: we have people who don't have any interest in actually learning about the policies politicians support (of either party), and they have the reigns on power in a democracy. The likelihood that anyone will affect the outcome of an election is minuscule, so people vote for "civic duty" or the entertainment value of the event. No one is making a list of policies each politician is expected to support and calculating cost/benefit for each. Heck, most people know that politicians are bad at keeping their campaign promises, much less their "values."
The problem is not education. The problem is a system that allows people who have no interest in making a calculated choice to make a choice that is foisted everyone. You can't even claim that outcomes would be much better if everyone who voted was required to have a Master's degree.
It might have something to do with "Kansas adopted the Renewable Energy Standards Act in 2009, which required the state’s utility companies to generate or purchase 20 percent of their energy from renewable sources – like wind and solar – by 2020." That is, they forced themselves to do it -- regardless of the price. Not saying it wasn't cheaper, but that they would have switched regardless of whether it were cheaper or not in the end.
The thing is that different energy sources are going to have different prices and efficacy depending on where you are. I'm sure that fossil fuels are still cheaper per kilowatt hour in northern Canada than solar is, and that wind power in San Francisco is going to be more expensive than in Texas.
The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much.