You're correct that startups are designed with the intention of monopolization; however, they don't do so through innovation. They do so through "disruption", w

You're correct that startups are designed with the intention of monopolization; however, they don't do so through innovation. They do so through "disruption", which is generally just ignoring regulations and applying a veneer of innovation to it, which is my point. > We already reduce financial risk with bankruptcy laws. This is not sufficient. Bankrupcy laws don't pay people's bills while they try out something new and uncertain. > Reducing risk is one thing, but if you lean too far into that with VC money [...] I'm arguing that VC money isn't a way to reduce risk. It just shifts the risk. > Reducing risk isn't the key. You need skin in the game. But more important, you need people with drive. People that like winning more than they hate losing. Sorry, but this is feel-good motivational-speaker nonsense with an undertone of toxic masculinity. Actual research into motivation shows pretty consistently that people are intrinsically motivated so long as their basic needs are met. (Which capitalism doesn't.)