this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
398 points (96.7% liked)

Memes

4028 readers
1 users here now

Good memes, bad memes, unite towards a united front.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] quarrk@hexbear.net 100 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Competition even in theory:

I won the competition, now buy my linen at 10x its value. Btw it costs 1,000 years of the average salary to start up a competing business, good luck lol

porky-happy speech-l

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 38 points 1 year ago

That's what we call economies of scale in modern parlance. :)

[–] ClimateChangeAnxiety@hexbear.net 82 points 1 year ago (70 children)

Capitalism only works on paper, it doesn’t take human nature into account

[–] UnicodeHamSic@hexbear.net 55 points 1 year ago

No, it doesn't even work on paper. We don't need to build two competing factories to see what is best. We invented science. Somebody can just make a graph. It's that easy

[–] PoY@lemmygrad.ml 33 points 1 year ago

I dunno.. even on paper the idea of infinite growth in a system of limited resources doesn't seem to work ..

[–] usernamesaredifficul@hexbear.net 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

capitalism only works if you just really hate feudalism but also want to keep the rich people in charge which is what it was designed to do. In much the same way that the united states of America was only really created to form a singe legal entity to be responsible for sharing the debt of the revolutionary war accross the states and everything since is just mission creep

which is a large part of why the American constitution is so messed up and such a dysfunctional and stupid legal foundation of a country, the country wasn't really designed with maintainability or long term existence in mind from the start

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (67 replies)
[–] moujikman@hexbear.net 64 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Tacit collusion is literally everywhere and completely normalized. A coworker was describing a revenue-sharing agreement but actually described collusion to set prices.

[–] AmarkuntheGatherer@lemmygrad.ml 40 points 1 year ago

You call it collusion, we call it obeying market realities! As in, capitalists invent a reality and the people obey it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Life2Space@lemmygrad.ml 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

"Competition is good because it leads to cheaper prices for consumers", doesn't really work since it neglects the union of the state and monopolies to artificially charge higher prices for items of the same - even worse quality; while hindering competition that has the potential to change the status quo.

I mean—the US is trying to prevent the world from cooperating with China, Russia and other major economies because they know that they are incapable of competing due to their decades-long crusade of neoliberalism. Another example is the fossil fuel industry stalling for time against the wave of the renewable energy era; or the automobile industry lobbying against efficient public transportation.

The point is that the major neoliberal powers don't want competition to exist; they just want rent-seeking sectors that can earn them a treasure trove of money as fast as possible.

[–] PoY@lemmygrad.ml 28 points 1 year ago (3 children)

or the oil industry teaming up with the US government to kill off electric transportation 60+ years ago and prior to that killing off rail transportation

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 24 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Thing is that it's not a static system. Competition leads to winners growng. Bigger companies enjoy advantages such as economies of scale, brand recognition, established supply chains, and so on.

This means that the initial cost for new players that want ti compete with such companies grows as well. Forx example, a scrappy startup isn't going to be able to take on Amazon.

And if a new company does develop something that gives it a serious advantage then the bigger company can just buy it out.

[–] PoY@lemmygrad.ml 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I had this discussion with my brother in law while drinking one night. He was going on about the free market or something and we sort of just talked through how the market could be free like people say. Organically we both realized just by talking it through that there's no way the could be a "free market" because the rules are always backed by state violence or the threat thereof.
But beyond that, as certain companies succeed, they grow. As they grow they kill competition either by absorbing them, by out competing them, or by using vast resources to kill them through attrition. As they continue to grow they diversity to try to gain further advantages. They begin to control their supply chains and own the resources that ensure even their would be competitors become reliant on them, essentially neutering potential competition. They corner markets. If there were a "free market" it would end up as a single company that owned everything. At a certain point a single company would become so integral and so powerful that it would control the government, the banks, and all the resources and it would care nothing for anyone outside of the people who keep it in power and control.

Obviously this isn't how things are though. There isn't a "free market", instead there are cabals that rig the system to keep themselves on top but none seem to gain enough advantage to kill off each other to take over entirely. There are likely many reasons why that hasn't or maybe can't happen outside of a singular perfectly seized opportunity, but the resulting situation we find ourselves in is hardly any better. It's close enough that most people in the world are deemed unimportant and expendable, if not detrimental.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Life2Space@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't think that we disagree. Because, for the reasons that you have provided, competition will produce almost-indestructible monopolies as a natural consequence, and those monopolies have a tendency to use their extensive power to destroy and buy out potential competitors and seek for quick, easy ways to accumulate wealth; notably, through rentier capitalism.

This is literally what's happening right now; at least, in the US.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 39 points 1 year ago (7 children)

"I'm going to add surveillance technology and a subscription service to my milk carton." lord-bezos-amused

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] SovietyWoomy@hexbear.net 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There used to be one streaming service. It had pretty much everything and cost half of what modern streaming services cost. Now there are several streaming services competing with each other that all have smaller libraries at higher prices. Plenty of them require paying users to watch ads. Weird.

[–] CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml 20 points 1 year ago

And through all that I get any show I want completely free on Stremio. Piracy will always win.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CyberGhost@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

1 step closer from selling rat milk!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›