3 ms·

He`s not talking about policy. Most capitalistic businesses are anti-competitive regardless of policy.

• cmdrfred 10y ago
  That is patently ridiculous. The vast majority of firms that you give your dollars too have direct competitors. They may not prefer to have competitors, but neither do you when applying for jobs or bidding on a house, that is pretty basic human nature.
  • AstralStorm 10y ago
    They have what is generally considered an unfair advantage though. Typically at least effects of scale and cartel-like contracts with other major players.
  • Stillrigged777 10y ago
    Toyota and GM happily get together to battle against support for alternative forms of mass transit. They have little worry about losing out to light rail for example. No, I'm not interested in a debate about the cost benefit blah blah. I'm using light rail as an example to facilitate the point. IMO, that's what the previous post is talking about. GM and Toyota largely release the exact same product if you look at it from an engineering data perspective; combustion engine, suspension, cupholders. And the "market" is highly protective and curated towards them (oil industry subsidies helping bring down gas prices, bailouts). Alternatives, like GM's battery car in the 90s, are mothballed and too expensive for outsiders to really get in on. Plus the key players obviously don't want to get away from fossil fuels, right? So they keep getting favorites.
  • mlmlmasd 10y ago
    Wait, so you say 'that is patently ridiculous', then completely agree with me while trying to add your own little spin on it? Okay bud.