Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A political organization like EU has no say in this. This is the short-sighted view. The unguided free market very often makes "decisions" that are detrimental to society as a whole, and it is absolutely necessary for political organisations to correct for this.
Society and legislators should only forbid harmful action. Not doing something helpful is very different than doing something hurtful. Compelling helpful action leads to all kinds of absurd conclusions. For example, that we should we compel doctors to work more hours because anytime they spend at home is to the detriment of their patients.
No it doesn't. Besides, "not doing something helpful" vs "doing something hurtful" is often simply a matter of perspective.
> For example, that we should we compel doctors to work more hours because anytime they spend at home is to the detriment of their patients.
To use your own language, this example is completely absurd. Here is your logic applied to forbidding harmful actions: "Setting speed limits on roads leads to all kinds of absurd conclusions, for example that we should forbid people to walk too fast in their homes."