4 ms·

I don't understand your argument. It sounds like customers were reacting to their environment more than driving change.

• JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > sounds like customers were reacting to their environment more than driving change It sounds like customers had agency. Tides of capital gave them more or fewer options, and they chose them at their discretion when the terms were advantageous. When they weren't, ever or any longer, they didn't.
  • digging 2y ago
    ...In other words, because DoorDash is convenient and advantageous for customers, they choose to get food delivered instead of go to the restaurant. And admonishing people for choosing the advantageous option is useless, at best. Does that not follow?
    • JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      You argued "customer behavior is driven by the tides of capital." That's attributing cause and effect. The tides of capital didn't cause the customer behaviour, it enabled existing behaviour to scale. Capital driving behaviour describes diamonds, not DoorDash.
      • digging 2y ago
        I'm really confused by your reply, and it doesn't answer the question I posed, so maybe that's that.