Comment

Comment on The existence of billionaires is a policy failure

In a free market, competition has end results. Buisnes don’t just keep competing with one another ad infinitum. One of them eventually cant keep up and closes shop. It’s competitors expand into the space it previously filled. This process repeats until you have fewer and fewer firms that account for more and more of their sector of the economy. New business do not have resources to eke out space in an already filled niche.

Under a long enough time frame, a free market creates less competition.

source

Sort:hotnew top

FlyingCircus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Yep. People love free markets, but they really only benefit billionaires. The idea that free markets lead to a better society is bunk and should be abandoned along with every other capitalist lie.

source
vga@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
I don’t remember that ever happening without government coercion. Can you refresh my memory?

source
- AppleTea@lemmy.zip ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Sorry, do you think a business failing is only possible with government coercion?
  
  And what government coercion gave Google near monopolies on web search and video? Microsoft Windows accounts for 70% of desktop computers, did a government give them that? Whom did the government coerce for Amazon to have such domination of server hosting and online retail?
  
  I don’t think you’ve been paying close attention to whats been happening in your lifetime.
  
  source
  - vga@sopuli.xyz ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    
    Sorry, do you think a business failing is only possible with government coercion?
    
    No, more like that actual monopolies are possible only by government coercion. Failure obviously doesn’t require that.
    
    And what government coercion gave Google near monopolies on web search and video? Microsoft Windows accounts for 70% of desktop computers, did a government give them that? Whom did the government coerce for Amazon to have such domination of server hosting and online retail?
    
    Yeah, that is true at least in the short term. Windows indeed had even larger percentages at some point, but eventually it has been chipped away by competition.
    
    I’m not calling free markets a magic tool that always works well. Rather a tool that needs to be controlled carefully and as little as possible for the best results. For instance, making Microsoft stop bundling IE with their operating system in the 90s, I’m not sure if that decision had any effect. Then again, EU declaring that mobile operators must adhere to certain rulesets opened up the market a whole lot. So it’s not just about following the best ideology, the details of decisions have to be good as well.
    
    source