3 ms·
Monopolies. Why would that be hard to understand? When companies don't need to compete for your labor they won't. Also it's not just wages. The entire marke
by timewizard 1y ago
Monopolies.
Why would that be hard to understand? When companies don't need to compete for your labor they won't.
Also it's not just wages. The entire market is stagnant. Innovation has ground to a halt and billions are poured into wasteful deadend technologies.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> Monopolies. Why would that be hard to understand? Valid hypothesis. Needs to be substantiated, as the author has done, and explain the stagnation and real wage increases.
- timewizard 1y ago> Needs to be substantiated It is. I'm just not willing to do that here as I'm not writing an article just making a comment. > as the author has done Myself and the author have completely different aims with the use of our time. > and explain the stagnation and real wage increases Doesn't the article point out that most of these increases have only gone to the already wealthy? It seems that even with an explanation failing to contextualize it reduces the value of the explanation to zero. The author, while substantial, has missed this point staring them right in the face.