> Do you not see it as a problem that Google alone decides the cost of entry to an entire market? This puts Google in the position of being a monopsony for the

> Do you not see it as a problem that Google alone decides the cost of entry to an entire market? This puts Google in the position of being a monopsony for the labor of programmers; that is, they're the only or primary buyer of that commodity. Part of antitrust laws is preventing that, so, yes, there is a problem if a monopsony arises, but Google isn't in that position anyway because jobs aren't completely interchangeable the same way programmers aren't completely interchangeable. For example, companies can compete on the basis of not being Google, which attracts some people. Companies can compete on the basis of being based in some other geographic location, or having other things to work on, or having a different mix of salary and benefits. Google offering the highest salary doesn't mean they automatically get everyone. It means they get people who want the highest salary to do what Google's interested in as opposed to wanting to work on some kinds of technology Google isn't pursuing.