This is certainly a question that simply put can be restated: more government control or more individual freedom of choice. The more direct control a government, at any level, has on the economy it is able to directly impact the "winners and losers" within the economy. If the government leadership favors your business, you will be more likely to have laws and regulations written that can improve your chances of becomine successful. This is a major reason why lobbyists and that industry spend more every day on lobbying members of Congress than a Congressman makes in a year.
When a business is more heavily regulated, the cost of doing business will go up for the business and that cost will be passed along to the consumer. For example, OSHA regulations require workers to be certified in something to make them a better employee or a safer employee. The cost of the worker going to that certification training and the cost of the training itself, including the lost time of the employee working, are added up by the business and put into new jobs that the employee will do in the future. This is done to help with the bottom line (profit) of the company because if the company is not going to be able to have a profit that allows the owners to remain in business, then the business will close. Another example of how regulation by government can impact business, during a speech given earlier this year, our President stated that if a company wanted to open a new coal mine, he would not oppose the idea because the regulations that will be put own such a business would make it impossible to be profitable. An example of eciding "winners and losers" through government control and action, not the marketplace itself.
Tax breaks is an area of large dispute, especially at local and state levels. Do these tax breaks and incentives for certain businesses to come to a city or state create new tax revenue and new jobs enough to offset the breaks in paying taxes that the company has been able to acquire by the government.
Government must be involved in the economy but the amount of control is directly related to the level of choice that the people have within that economy. The proper role of government involvement, in my opinion, is the strongly look for the best methods of making sure the consumer is protected from fraud and dangerous business practices and the workers are given a safe environment to make a living in. When government moves beyond those areas, creating an incentive for business to set up "differing roads to success for different businesses" then the government has gone too far.