Calculated Sacrifice of Franchisees to Free Trade Principles?

Poster wants to use "restraint of trade" and "regulation restraint" as excuse for failure to disclose the true and real risk of a franchised business opportunity to the buyer of the franchise.

These posters who are so against any effective regulation and who would sacrifice franchisees to bad business investments in the interests of their profits and the "economy" have no problem with the government, the SBA, making them rich with tax-payer money that stands behind the guarantees for the banks and the lenders -- and the franchisors have no problem with government initiatives like THE PATRIOT EXPRESS LOAN that will allow them to capture the capital of the franchisees who, in both success and failure, will feed the franchisors and the economy.

It doesn't matter to them that the targeted group who will be eligible for Patriot Express Loans are human beings who may have already given an arm, or a leg, or an eye to protect free markets, democracy and capitalism in the world. They seem to be indicating that. if government doesn't continue to subsidize the franchisors by allowing them to obscure the actual and real risk of the investment, this will result in "restraint of trade" and be bad for the economy and bad for the profits of the franchisors and the banks, etc...

Is franchising really that risky? Is the real rate of failure so high that you would be willing to sacrifice veterans to prevent the failure rate of the franchises from being disclosed under law? You would take the other leg and the arm from this targeted group to protect the myth of "a business of your own" and to provide the "venture" capital to keep the fires of development going.

Is this what you are saying?