And the correct amount of force to use is whatever the minimal amount is. Because although private efforts may produce bad results, those results are at least contained and individual or group-individuated, not universally mandated. And you have the most amount of flexibility in receiving and responding to those outcomes, positively and negatively. But mandated and established government programs are slow to learn and even slower to adapt or change.

“Small enough to fail” is the great benefit of individuality and private enterprise. Government programs are almost always too big to fail, and so are unlikely to learn or adapt, and rely almost entirely on their value and the risk being worth it by them having been established as massive net positives beyond a shadow of a doubt before being enacted (in an ideal situation).

It is not a the job of government to decide that some people or some businesses “should” succeed. That’s overreach. That’s harming the very people you’re trying to help by making them dependent and fostering unnatural conditions, distorting reality, as well as propagating unfair treatment on everyone who you haven’t decided to give special preference to.

It doesn’t really matter who your prejudice is for, this side or that side. It’s the attempt to mandate results a priori that’s mistaken and results in bad ends, false conditions, injustice, dependence, and dishonesty. The government’s proper job is to resist such attempts and establish neutral codes that apply equally to everyone, regardless. Codes that everyone could agree to if you didn’t know which side of them you would be likely to end up on.