Comes in more than one guise. Russ Roberts points to a piece about GE’s going green. As I said, way back when, on the same subject:

Mr. Immelt runs the biggest company in America, and for that reason
some environmental groups hailed his speech last week on climate change
as a tipping point in the global warming debate. Mr. Immelt chose his
words carefully and did not directly criticize Mr. Bush. But he left no
doubt that he believes mandatory controls on emissions of carbon
dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, are necessary and inevitable. And he
said he would double investments by G.E. in energy and environmental
technologies to prepare it for what he sees as a huge global market for
products that help other companies – and countries like China and India
– reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

Let me see if I can decode that. A businessman, responsible to his
shareholders, announces a new strategy, large investments in a
particular set of technologies. He then calls on the government to
impose laws to make the use of his bright shiny new equipment
mandatory. And the NYT supports this?

Have they not heard the phrase "Corporate Welfare"?

Indeed, it is precisely to achieve a level playing field that more and
more big utilities – the very companies Mr. Bush and Vice President
Dick Cheney thought they were letting off the hook – are now calling on
Congress to consider mandatory controls.

Does no one there read Adam Smith any more?

"Businessmen seldom gather together except to conspire against the public interest." ?