Corporations and governments are separate entities. Corporations pursue monetary profit, whereas the government represents the people. As 13 billionaires and the world’s richest man have been inaugurated into office by our billionaire president, it’s less likely that regulations on the system that made these elite politicians rich will actually be enforced. But if corporate activity is not regulated, the protection of consumers’ personal data, market security and safety becomes endangered.

For example, despite laws requiring companies to protect users’ personal data, corporations can still sell that data or leave it vulnerable to leaks. In 2016, when the personal data of 57 million users and drivers of Uber was breached, the company bribed the hackers responsible to be quiet. Yet despite intentionally keeping the breach under wraps for a year, the company did not have to face any immediate financial consequences. It was only until a year later that the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) made them pay a $148 million settlement with state attorney generals.

Similarly, around that time, news broke out about an event known as the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where it was revealed that Facebook allowed third-party apps to harvest personal data from millions of non-consenting users. Again, it wasn’t until the following year when the FTC had them pay $5 billion, but only for broader privacy concerns — not the initial data sharing issue. Instances like these exemplify the issue of companies neglecting the security of consumer data and only taking financial responsibility for any resulting damage when federal regulatory committees force them to pay up. Companies who have been involved in these leaks have in some instances changed their security regulations after the incident, been subject to long investigation periods or could have not been aware of the data breach at all. But the point is that there wouldn’t be justice for the consumers impacted by data breaches and mismanagement if not for federal regulators.

Further, these regulators have investigated corporate monopolies, surveillance pricing and price dynamism, all of which could disrupt fair market security for consumers. For instance, the merging of one of the largest supermarket companies blocked by the FTC would allegedly eliminate business and employee competition, lead to higher grocery prices for consumers and lower product quality and wages for workers. Last year, regulators launched an investigation of eight companies suspected of surveillance pricing, a business practice using consumer data like purchasing behavior, location and browsing history to set personalized pricing for their goods and services.

Comparatively, companies like Uber utilize dynamic pricing algorithms to set their prices higher for consumers and drivers under circumstantial conditions, even when potentially unsafe or unpredictable. The algorithm also affects their drivers, who face low and inconsistent pay meant to maximize profit for the company. This goes to show the impact the FTC has had on regulating corporate action on behalf of consumers, not profit and how much more there is to be done to ensure a fair market for all.

Even more, federal regulation on corporations can protect consumer rights to safety. To illustrate, Boeing had for several years allegedly neglected quality and safety concerns during manufacturing, like avoiding pilot retraining and upgrading training manuals to maximize short-term earnings. This prompted whistleblowers like the former employee John Barnett to file lawsuits, in which Barnett could not continue due to his death. In connection with two 737 Max 8 plane crashes that killed 346 people in 2018 and 2019, the company pleaded guilty to felony fraud charges and was ordered to pay a fine to the government and change their internal security protocols due to misleading regulators and the public about the aircraft’s safety last year. It’s clear that this company was more interested in profit than the lives of their consumers.

When a few elite companies are trusted responsible for the maintenance of society, the issue arises when their systems are designed for profit, not the well-being of their consumers.

For example, the Industrial Revolution’s Gilded Age marked the growth of the economy, technological innovation and urbanization, but also the inequalities of wealthy businessmen profiting at the expense of the people. Under a non-regulated market, factory workers, including women and children, faced overcrowding, pollution, public health crises and often worked long hours with little pay in unsafe conditions. It wasn’t until the government interfered with the economy that worker’s lives improved. After all, corporations started facing regulatory policies, labour movements began to be taken seriously and social safety nets were provided for the first time.

These movements, whistleblowers and modern day strikes were, and still are, cries for help by the public facing immoral corporate practices. It’s the reason why government interference in the market is so important for consumer well-being. In order to secure consumer data, fairness of the market and safety of consumers, corporations must be regulated through the following actions: first, Citizens United needs to be overturned to limit the amount of influence corporations have on the federal government. Second, voters must be cognizant of who they elect, knowing that who they choose would determine welfare budgets, tax policies and corporate political power. Third, a comprehensive national privacy law needs to be implemented to better protect the security of consumers. After all, the government’s duty is to represent the people — not businesses.