39 ms·

> Standard Oil Sounds like the government should and did step in at the "until they couldn't" part, which is not where we're at. Hard to imagine someone unable

• paulryanrogers 6y ago
  Consumers and competing businesses were still harmed during Standard Oil's rise. Why wait until there are no practical alternatives left?
  • themacguffinman 6y ago
    Other businesses are always harmed during the rise of a dominant business, that's what happens when a dominant business takes marketshare away from you. The question at hand is whether they took their share unfairly. In Standard Oil's case, the government found that they did, which maybe happened too late in Standard Oil's case. But even though it takes time to determine wrongdoing, we still prosecute crimes after they happen instead of before for obvious reasons. You wait until there is evidence of harm to consumers. Maybe the government has evidence, this is just an early article after all, but again, it's hard to imagine someone unable to stop using Facebook or Instagram or whatever, there's a lot of social media out there.
    • paulryanrogers 6y ago
      Where to draw the line is the controversy. Consumer harm isn't always obvious or easily reversible given corporate adversaries with more resources than mid-sized countries.