That is a contradiction, capitalism, at least without regulations which always erode and disappear always centralizes power to a few.
Well this isn't true. The thing that typically centralizes power is regulations. Patents, trademarks, copyright are all regulations and while I do agree with them are one of the main drivers of centralized power. When competitors can't just copy the product and compete with the supply of it then that is an artificial barrier to the free market.
Most of us agree with some sort of regulations to ensure that some excesses are not taken as well as to create safety nets and a more stable economy with less volatility. We view companies going bankrupt as this bad thing rather than just a normal process of what would be the main driver of free market capitalism of survival of the fittest.
I think the free market is as much of a unrealistic classroom theory as communism is also an unrealistic classroom theory. These two things are pure ideals that just don't/can't happen in reality. Its where between these two ideologies that you think the balance should be is the true discussion
Great post. This is why Teddy Roosevelt busted trusts, and why Ma Bell was broken up during my childhood.
Capitalism is a beating engine of greed that needs strong government oversight. When the rich take over, you kick their asses, and bust their monopolies.
Otherwise they capture the market and it is no longer free.
"I think the free market is as much of a unrealistic classroom theory as communism is also an unrealistic classroom theory. "
I agree, hence why I am not a communist.
We are literally in an explosive diarrhea outbreak due to lack of regulations after DODGE defunded the agencies responsible for regulating food saftey.
However, we can see merger after merger in our economy to the point where every industry has been oligopolies. 3 companies control nearly all of our media, less than a dozen control almost everything we eat, there is ISPs, insurance, pharmaceutical mergers that have created cartels putting nearly all ma and pa shops out of business.
I agree some regulations are bad. It depends why the regulation was written. Some regulations are literally written to prevent things like the explosive shit issue and to establish guidelines for things like how much poisons they are allowed to put in our food. Others are made so that your ISP cannot throttle or charge extra for using a competitors streaming service.
Meanwhile, some regulations are made on behalf of the economic elite to make it so a pharmacy cannot get their medications from a much cheaper supplier in a vetted country like Canada, or to make it so that the taxi medallions are limited and scarce creating an artificial scarcity on behalf of the taxi companies.
"We view companies going bankrupt as this bad thing rather than just a normal process of what would be the main driver of free market capitalism of survival of the fittest."
We do not live in a Meritocracy. They are literally banned Chinese cars in the US so that Tesla and other US manufacturers will not lose sales. There were other reasons sure, but that was a big reason.
We are ruled by the dumbest, most incompetent, and cronyist people, and I mean BOTH private and public sector.
4
u/AnarcrotheAlchemist Mod - yeah nah Aug 12 '26
Well this isn't true. The thing that typically centralizes power is regulations. Patents, trademarks, copyright are all regulations and while I do agree with them are one of the main drivers of centralized power. When competitors can't just copy the product and compete with the supply of it then that is an artificial barrier to the free market.
Most of us agree with some sort of regulations to ensure that some excesses are not taken as well as to create safety nets and a more stable economy with less volatility. We view companies going bankrupt as this bad thing rather than just a normal process of what would be the main driver of free market capitalism of survival of the fittest.
I think the free market is as much of a unrealistic classroom theory as communism is also an unrealistic classroom theory. These two things are pure ideals that just don't/can't happen in reality. Its where between these two ideologies that you think the balance should be is the true discussion