3 ms·
So you would be in favour of an otherwise free market, but with the government breaking up companies that grow too* big? I.e., you agree excessive concentration
by DarkKomunalec 10y ago
So you would be in favour of an otherwise free market, but with the government breaking up companies that grow too* big? I.e., you agree excessive concentration of money and power is harmful, and would be willing to compromise free market ideals to prevent it?
Also, just because -some- companies can outperform larger ones in some areas, does not mean greater size does not have significant advantages. There's a good reason there's no mom&pop car manufacturers.
*E.g. so big that consumers no longer have a meaningful choice, or so big that they start to benefit from monopoly pricing or price collusion, or are able to make use of anti-competitive practices, such as stores selling their own brands more prominently.
- teekert 10y agoI'm not arguing for intervention at all. I arguing against lobbying. Lobbying makes a market non-free, you know, when voters have to save an investment bank that is too large to fail while said bank cost them their jobs and their house. Such things can only happen in a corrupt society. I'm not claiming to have the solution I'm merely claiming that we should decouple politics from the wealthy and recouple it with everybody else.