5 ms·
> It has no built-in control for a company that becomes too big to the point of being a detriment to society. That's verifiably untrue. One of the key traits o
by bhupy 5y ago
> It has no built-in control for a company that becomes too big to the point of being a detriment to society.
That's verifiably untrue. One of the key traits of capitalism is that businesses are allowed to fail, and we see that they do fail. 30 years ago, the retail and supply chain behemoth was Sears; today that's Amazon; 30 years from now, it might be someone else.
Berkshire Hathaway recently remarked on the dynamism as seen in the top 20 companies in the world in 1990 vs today.
https://twitter.com/brettberson/status/1388555627698429953 https://twitter.com/brettberson/status/1388555627698429953
It's almost entirely a different set of companies.
- mLuby 5y ago> Berkshire Hathaway recently remarked on the dynamism as seen in the top 20 companies in the world in 1990 vs today. 180-year-old 360,000-person company worth half a trillion dollars says what? (They might not be wrong, but they certainly aren't impartial.)
- drivebycomment 5y agoThe linked twit simply shows top 20 largest companies by market cap in 1990 vs today. That's a fact. If you want to argue that the particular fact is somehow misleading or misrepresenting, please put an argument with an evidence - without that, this falls into the "attacking the motive" fallacy.