3 ms·

In business, the customer is getting value from the economies of scale of the business, while the business collects their margin to further grow those economies

In business, the customer is getting value from the economies of scale of the business, while the business collects their margin to further grow those economies of scale. If the customer is reducing the value for other customers, then they are breaking the virtuous cycle of the business. This is unstable and will result in either the customer or the business being hurt. If the business is hurt, all of its customers are hurt to some degree because the cost will be passed onto them. This is a matter of consumer protection. Bad actors who reduce the value of other customers should not be tolerated. Simply sharing vendors with Parler had costs for other companies and reduced the value from doing business with the vendor.

cwkoss 6y ago
> Bad actors who reduce the value of other customers should not be tolerated. I don't agree with this argument. "Bad" is subjective and changes based on political perspective. If Parler was instead a pro-abortion forum, and it was taken down by a conservative company citing that abortion is an 'act of violence' (I don't agree, but many pro-lifers do) I think we'd see very few of the same voices cheering. Businesses should tolerate some higher-cost customers. Ex. If a restaurant wants to exceed regulatory accessibility requirements to make their business serve disabled clients better, that is a good thing. Similar examples: multilingual support, making female hygiene product freely available, parental leave. This does 'reduce value for other customers' but is a net societal good (and hopefully most customers get some amount of that reduced value back in feeling good about helping people). Some customers costing business more isn't necessarily a bad thing that should be avoided.