That only holds up if consumers are either withheld almost all information, or simply don't care.
To be clear, administration doesn't create law - only legislation does. Regulation only makes sense if its enforcing the will of the people. If the people have access to the basics, like what Koch industries actually does or a record of the most recent safety issues with Boeing planes, they can act themselves. Why do we need a heavy and every-growing web of regulators and centralized authority to enforce this?
If a company is screwing with the environment in ways that I am not okay with, why wouldn't I just stop giving them my money rather than waiting for regulators to eventually catch up and hope that both regulators aren't bought by special interests and that they leave no loop holes?
> this kind of “unfettered” capitalism.
What does this mean exactly? What is fettered capitalism in your definition, and when does it stop being capitalism at all? As far as I see it, capitalism like free speech is an all or nothing affair. I'm totally okay with people choosing to not want the risks of free speech or capitalism, but it isn't a spectrum as the value if both is lost as soon as you start putting guard rails on it.
Regulations and administrative law exists to prevent a free-for-all of “fuck you, do something about it”.
Because your air, your water, your society is at risk from this kind of “unfettered” capitalism.