So you aren't against unbridled capitalism and your defense for opposing the proposal is the strawman of compelling them to give it away rather than compelling them to sell at a reasonable rate as the article suggests. So which is it? Unbridled, or regulated? Only you are suggesting they should do it for free.

I understand now. You're legitimately suggesting that. I thought it was an extreme suggestion to point to the absurdity of what is actually being asked. Tone in text sucks.

Well, I'm not against that either.