I see you're just going to keep running in circles avoiding the points I made. Your examples are self defeating: If lobbying is able to curb regulation, that just proves the regulators can be bribed.
It all comes down to logic:
Everyone has only one thing in mind, which is to benefit oneself. In an actual free and competitive market, this has the effect that there is only one way someone can become rich or earn a living, which is to produce something others want to consume. If you don't do that or if you fuck up your product(like say, an aviation company who uses planes not fit for flying and kills people), competition will simply eat you alive. So, you have a very strong incentive to not let that happen, otherwise you'll go broke(people don't normally want to use planes from companies who have a history of crashes). Plus, you should have a justice system that effectively punishes those who do that on purpose, adding to that effect.
On the other hand, if you have a regulated market, the same people involved continue to have only one thing in mind, which is to benefit themselves. However, the incentives change completely: The regulator has power to decide who produces, who sells... That power makes them very interesting in the eyes of very rich and established businesses, who want to keep competition out and curb the regulations. The perfect stage for corruption is set.
The businessmen know that, so now they have a few other options to get rich and mantain that, namely: they can continue to produce and improve their product like in a free market(much harder, takes a lot of effort and constant improving), they can bribe/lobby the regulator to kill competition(regulatory capture) or they can bribe the regulator so that he gets special benefits and don't let the rules that should be applied to everyone be applied to him, which has the effect of lowering his costs(much easier, especially for big businesses). Plus, if something bad happens(like a tragedy in a plane crash), since he has killed the competition through regulation, people don't have many choices of other companies to resort to, so they have more leeway in fucking up, without actually having to be so scared of going broke because of competition.
This explains why so many companies that engage in monumental fuck ups (including Boeing, TAM, some banks and whatnot) continue to exist, despite their monumental errors.
So, you see, you live in a fantasy world where angels put in positions of power in the government will put their own interests aside for the good of others. I simply see the reality: there are no angels, but you can use the wish to benefit oneself to get the best possible results and you do that by letting people compete in a truly free market.
