3 ms·

Yes, the government created yet another situation where it does not matter what happens on the market the company does not fail. This is why capitalism does not

Yes, the government created yet another situation where it does not matter what happens on the market the company does not fail. This is why capitalism does not work as people think it works, governments actively circumventing the basic rules of markets.

ClumsyPilot 6y ago
What do you mean "the government created" - some markets naturally have a tendency to create monopolies because they are winner takes all. Governments have to actively interfere with that process and break them up - just look at bit tech.
- Guthur 6y ago
  Come on, which ones are you talking about FB, Twitter, Netflix, Google, MS, Amazon, Oracle, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and on and on. How many companies does there have to be for the monopoly record to stop? Frankly at this stage I'd have to say that word doesn't mean what HN thinks it means.
  - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
    Do multiple cosecutive indictments by the ECJ not prove to you that Google has a monopily? What does it take to convince you, sacret gospel?
    - Guthur 6y ago
      Those are for anti competitive behaviour, it's actually not the same thing. One may led to the other but that's not equivalency. If you want to say Google and other companies may engage in anti competitive behaviour, sure. It's a somewhat subjective line though because most companies are in competition and trying to take or guard share from others, is that anti competitive?
- curryst 6y ago
  Them being a defense contractor creates a situation where their airplane business can't be allowed to fail for national security reasons. Even if another business takes their place, it will take time to ramp up, which may not be acceptable. That's the part the government created. There is a secondary problem in the duopoly that is Boeing and Airbus, but the government didn't necessarily cause that (that I'm aware of).
La1n 6y ago
>governments actively circumventing the basic rules of markets. Influential companies actively lobby for those circumventions, this is part of capitalism.
- StreamBright 6y ago
  I think this is the definition of corruption in any other country other than the USA. Your definition is called oligarchy. It has nothing to do with free markets. It is quite the opposite, how to limit free markets. https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp "Oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía); from ὀλίγος (olígos) 'few', and ἄρχω (arkho) 'to rule or to command')[1][2][3] is a form of power structure in which power rests with a small number of people." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy

ClumsyPilot 6y ago

What do you mean "the government created" - some markets naturally have a tendency to create monopolies because they are winner takes all. Governments have to actively interfere with that process and break them up - just look at bit tech.

Guthur 6y ago
Come on, which ones are you talking about FB, Twitter, Netflix, Google, MS, Amazon, Oracle, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and on and on. How many companies does there have to be for the monopoly record to stop? Frankly at this stage I'd have to say that word doesn't mean what HN thinks it means.
- ClumsyPilot 6y ago
  Do multiple cosecutive indictments by the ECJ not prove to you that Google has a monopily? What does it take to convince you, sacret gospel?
  - Guthur 6y ago
    Those are for anti competitive behaviour, it's actually not the same thing. One may led to the other but that's not equivalency. If you want to say Google and other companies may engage in anti competitive behaviour, sure. It's a somewhat subjective line though because most companies are in competition and trying to take or guard share from others, is that anti competitive?
curryst 6y ago
Them being a defense contractor creates a situation where their airplane business can't be allowed to fail for national security reasons. Even if another business takes their place, it will take time to ramp up, which may not be acceptable. That's the part the government created. There is a secondary problem in the duopoly that is Boeing and Airbus, but the government didn't necessarily cause that (that I'm aware of).

La1n 6y ago

>governments actively circumventing the basic rules of markets. Influential companies actively lobby for those circumventions, this is part of capitalism.

StreamBright 6y ago
I think this is the definition of corruption in any other country other than the USA. Your definition is called oligarchy. It has nothing to do with free markets. It is quite the opposite, how to limit free markets. https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp "Oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía); from ὀλίγος (olígos) 'few', and ἄρχω (arkho) 'to rule or to command')[1][2][3] is a form of power structure in which power rests with a small number of people." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy