4 ms·
> The market has failed. It's allowed massive monopolistic and anti-competitive scenarios to play out, and technology outran legislation like crazy. Why is tha
by chmod775 1y ago
> The market has failed. It's allowed massive monopolistic and anti-competitive scenarios to play out, and technology outran legislation like crazy.
Why is that the market's fault? That's like blaming a river for flowing downhill. The most stable configuration in a free market is a monopoly. Obviously everything eventually ends up as one without intervention. It's a mathematical certainty.
This is 100% on regulators allowing that to happen.
- observationist 1y agoI agree, and now that we have an existence proof for the exact way things have gone wrong, we can see that these companies are exploiting numbers of customers and consumers far greater than they can responsibly handle. We need to legislate what responsible means, in this context, and apply reasonable boundaries and limits on scale. A single company that leaks nearly every person's private information online should be held to account for irresponsible practices, having damaged the entire world, but despite this happening multiple times, they hardly even get a slap on the wrist. The status quo is untenable. We need better regulations that accommodate reality, and leave regulators no choice but to hold companies and people to account for the harms they do.
- 1718627440 1y ago> The most stable configuration in a free market is a monopoly. Free market doesn't mean unregulated. It means that the market reflects the true costs so market participants have free choice. When you have a monopoly, the market is probably not free anymore.