3 ms·

Actually you can support free markets and prevent large corporations Most large corporations become large not purely on market forces but because of Regulatory

by syshum 6y ago

Actually you can support free markets and prevent large corporations Most large corporations become large not purely on market forces but because of Regulatory capture where by they slam the door on competing businesses by passing "consumer friendly" regulations that is in reality more focused on preventing new comers to the market Why do you think Facebook is soo hell bent on getting regluations from the government on social media, because they know they will be one of the "stakeholders" that will help write them thus ensuring their market dominance Why do you think Amazon is now in favor of National Sales Tax regulations, because now that they have to pay sales tax in all 50 states is favors them to have 1 regulation vs 3000 Why do you think Walmart now favors raising the minimum wage, because social and economic pressure has forced them to raise their own wages so they want to ensure all companies have to pay the same wages they are Point to any large company that is in a position of market dominance and I will show the government regulations that allow them to operate in that way hell the very basis of the corporation is a fictitious entity created by government to limit liability, the laws around those corporations (especially public corporations) are government regulations written by large corporations for their benefit, That is not a free market at all

asimpletune 6y ago
I totally agree with this sentiment, e.g. > Why do you think Facebook is soo hell bent on getting regluations from the government on social media What truly threatens these corporations isn't regulation, in fact I'd wager they're counting on it. The real threat is the next Instagram that walks through the door that doesn't sell to FB. Basically, the biggest threat to FB is the fact that people don't really care about FB, they just want something to look at on their phones. It's totally in FB's best interest then to make it more difficult for competition to invent new ways to look for people to look at their phones. Banking and finance in general is probably the best example. It's so difficult to start a bank these days that your best bet is to acquire a failing one. However, on this point: > Point to any large company that is in a position of market dominance and I will show the government regulations that allow them to operate in that way I don't really see how Apple falls under this category? I can see it for Amazon, Netflix, Walmart, Google, Facebook, etc... but what about Apple?
- syshum 6y ago
  Apple is a wierd case, I agree. because while they are powerful they do not really have anywhere close to a monopoly, iPhone account for less than 35% of all mobile devices in the world, 50% in the US. It is a duopoly though with Android. This Duopoly is largely supported because of FCC Regulations and carrier restrictions it is very hard to get access to Wireless frequencies and ever harder to do that nation wide, given this it is hard to deploy a mobile device in the US. Apple then relies upon Copyright and Contract law both of which are favorable to large companies not consumers to ensure their market dominance by making it impossible to create interoperability between their ecosystem and others. Then you have the various Tax and general business regulations that favor all Large companies, some of which in general prohibit smaller companies from growing.

by syshum 6y ago

asimpletune 6y ago

I totally agree with this sentiment, e.g. > Why do you think Facebook is soo hell bent on getting regluations from the government on social media What truly threatens these corporations isn't regulation, in fact I'd wager they're counting on it. The real threat is the next Instagram that walks through the door that doesn't sell to FB. Basically, the biggest threat to FB is the fact that people don't really care about FB, they just want something to look at on their phones. It's totally in FB's best interest then to make it more difficult for competition to invent new ways to look for people to look at their phones. Banking and finance in general is probably the best example. It's so difficult to start a bank these days that your best bet is to acquire a failing one. However, on this point: > Point to any large company that is in a position of market dominance and I will show the government regulations that allow them to operate in that way I don't really see how Apple falls under this category? I can see it for Amazon, Netflix, Walmart, Google, Facebook, etc... but what about Apple?

syshum 6y ago
Apple is a wierd case, I agree. because while they are powerful they do not really have anywhere close to a monopoly, iPhone account for less than 35% of all mobile devices in the world, 50% in the US. It is a duopoly though with Android. This Duopoly is largely supported because of FCC Regulations and carrier restrictions it is very hard to get access to Wireless frequencies and ever harder to do that nation wide, given this it is hard to deploy a mobile device in the US. Apple then relies upon Copyright and Contract law both of which are favorable to large companies not consumers to ensure their market dominance by making it impossible to create interoperability between their ecosystem and others. Then you have the various Tax and general business regulations that favor all Large companies, some of which in general prohibit smaller companies from growing.