5 ms·

Profit in free markets drives competitors to come in and eat those profits. The problem we have right now is that BigCos use government to erect barriers to en

Profit in free markets drives competitors to come in and eat those profits. The problem we have right now is that BigCos use government to erect barriers to entry.

meaydinli 3y ago
There are plenty of monopolies, duopolies, etc in the "free" market that have nothing to do with governments. Example: How broadband companies share the map and don't intrude into each other's "territories".
- TulliusCicero 3y ago
  They're literally granted monopolies by local governments.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - telios 3y ago
    Largely in part due to regulatory capture; it is not necessarily innate of a government to cause this. Maybe restrictions on how corporations are able to influence governments to act against their constituency might solve this problem, rather than giving corporations carte blanche to do anything...
- parineum 3y ago
  Both ISPs and PG&E are monopolies/duopolies by government mandate. Those markets are incredibly far from the capitalist ideal of a free market. What you're looking at is corruption, not capitalism.
  - meaydinli 3y ago
    You are right, I forgot about that. I guess it is capitalism/greed induced corruption.
  - piva00 3y ago
    When the capital investment to compete with large players in the ISP/electricity market is enormous you will, eventually, end up with a monopoly either way. Laying cables for internet/electricity is expensive, I cannot comprehend why the USA hasn't understood this particularity and hasn't attempted to create a publicly-owned national grid and fibre infrastructure where providers can plug into and offer internet connectivity and electricity production over it. You do not want multiple competing companies laying down their own electricity cables, nor internet cables, it's wasteful and just creates a huge barrier for any competition to appear...
    - parineum 3y ago
      Other countries have tackled this issue by regulating that the company that owns the cable and the company that provides the service over the cables are separate entities, frequently with the cable owner being the state.
whoitwas 3y ago
Public utilities don't operate in a free market. It's not possible, the infrastructure is public.
postpawl 3y ago
BigCos using government to erect barriers to entry isn't a distortion of free markets. It’s an inherent outcome of capitalism's maturity, where monopolies and oligopolies emerge naturally.
rdedev 3y ago
The problem becomes when growth of profits is the only driving metric. At some point the company will look at ways to screw over any entity outside of the company to ensure profits and growth. Sure they erect barriers but this issue is prevalent among all big companies in the US.

Profit in free markets drives competitors to come in and eat those profits. The problem we have right now is that BigCos use government to erect barriers to entry.

meaydinli 3y ago

There are plenty of monopolies, duopolies, etc in the "free" market that have nothing to do with governments. Example: How broadband companies share the map and don't intrude into each other's "territories".

TulliusCicero 3y ago
They're literally granted monopolies by local governments.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- telios 3y ago
  Largely in part due to regulatory capture; it is not necessarily innate of a government to cause this. Maybe restrictions on how corporations are able to influence governments to act against their constituency might solve this problem, rather than giving corporations carte blanche to do anything...
parineum 3y ago
Both ISPs and PG&E are monopolies/duopolies by government mandate. Those markets are incredibly far from the capitalist ideal of a free market. What you're looking at is corruption, not capitalism.
- meaydinli 3y ago
  You are right, I forgot about that. I guess it is capitalism/greed induced corruption.
- piva00 3y ago
  When the capital investment to compete with large players in the ISP/electricity market is enormous you will, eventually, end up with a monopoly either way. Laying cables for internet/electricity is expensive, I cannot comprehend why the USA hasn't understood this particularity and hasn't attempted to create a publicly-owned national grid and fibre infrastructure where providers can plug into and offer internet connectivity and electricity production over it. You do not want multiple competing companies laying down their own electricity cables, nor internet cables, it's wasteful and just creates a huge barrier for any competition to appear...
  - parineum 3y ago
    Other countries have tackled this issue by regulating that the company that owns the cable and the company that provides the service over the cables are separate entities, frequently with the cable owner being the state.

whoitwas 3y ago

Public utilities don't operate in a free market. It's not possible, the infrastructure is public.

postpawl 3y ago

BigCos using government to erect barriers to entry isn't a distortion of free markets. It’s an inherent outcome of capitalism's maturity, where monopolies and oligopolies emerge naturally.

rdedev 3y ago

The problem becomes when growth of profits is the only driving metric. At some point the company will look at ways to screw over any entity outside of the company to ensure profits and growth. Sure they erect barriers but this issue is prevalent among all big companies in the US.