The market being regulated doesn't necessarily prevent collusion from happening, but makes it illegal when it does happen.
Kill the regulations helping the capitalists, not just the ones giving a hand to the worker, and then we can talk.
http://www.freetheworld.com/2013/EFW2013-complete.pdf (Page 22)
And in any case, if my position was opposed to yours, that argument wouldn't convince me anyway, since I find "economic size" and particularly "growth" to be little more than fetishes of mainstream ideologues. I'm much more easily convinced by what the economists call "consumer surplus", though I'd rather know the "worker surplus".
Like I said, its just the thing that I start with, just this statistic would not convince me either.
That seems like the sort of evidence that's actually useful when making policy decisions about whether we should increase or decrease regulation. Abolishing all regulations is not practical, so what political theorists think would happen in a complete absence of regulation is irrelevant to any real-world issues.
But in any case, if you think what would happen by abolishing all regulation is irrelevant to the real world, then you should be replying to RivieraKid, who was the one drawing such irrelevant (and, in my opinion, unsupported) conclusions.