3 ms·
I don't want more utilities, I want more competition, failure, and new players to fill spaces where old players died. Crony protectionism, and lax acquisition c
by Grimm1 5y ago
I don't want more utilities, I want more competition, failure, and new players to fill spaces where old players died. Crony protectionism, and lax acquisition constraints are why we have a lot of these companies at where they are.
When the seeming majority of exit plans for companies is an acquisition by a larger existing entity you have a problem. If our laws were better, people would be able to compete against <FAANG HERE> because they wouldn't have a hand in a crazy amount of markets and able to easily fend off good newcomers without a good amount of resources being expended. I heavily disagree with making things like Google a utility when the reason they're where they are today is largely artificial. They are not a natural monopoly they just took advantage of a weak government and pulled up the ladder behind themselves.
- zaptheimpaler 5y agoThe world is increasingly winner-take-all, so its hard to do that. Very few people want to use the second best search engine instead of the best, or constantly use multiple search engines. Seems like a natural monopoly to me. How can you complain about a weak-willed government in a post showing the opposite anyways?
- Grimm1 5y agoOne instance of a single state showing teeth means nothing about the strength of our federal government which matters much more here. How is Google a natural monopoly?
- istjohn 5y agoIt could be a natural monopoly if Google is able to use their user's click traffic to out-manuever SEO spam and their competition is unable to reach the necessary scale to obtain sufficient volume of user click traffic to compete with Google on quality.