I am not sure that I would agree that “only the state” can prevent abuse. This seems a rather narrow frame through which to view the situation. Why would private enterprise collude to do such a thing that would clearly drive away customers? It is theoretically possible that such a thing could happen — but certainly unlikely. However, a state that could prevent it is a state that could enforce it. Thus, to create the conditions in which a state is positioned to prevent such activity necessarily means creating and empowering a state that could enforce it.
I am not sure that I would agree that “only the state” can prevent abuse. This seems a rather narrow frame through which to view the situation. Why would private enterprise collude to do such a thing that would clearly drive away customers? It is theoretically possible that such a thing could happen — but certainly unlikely. However, a state that could prevent it is a state that could enforce it. Thus, to create the conditions in which a state is positioned to prevent such activity necessarily means creating and empowering a state that could enforce it.