Capitalism is based around the possibility of financial and social mobility and uncontrolled market. The concentration we see today goes against this idea. I'm about to respond my original conclusion about socialism in another comment, but I start to think we went too large scale here too, and some balancing is needed.
astar26
joined 1 year ago
OK that's really funny, I didn't understand why it resembles Hebrew and this is very very close (letter names are even the same).
Ignoring the table and reading it in Yiddish (which uses the same letters as in Hebrew with different pronunciation) this read closely to “oh my god“ ("omeged" but close enough)
Edit: reading right to left, of course.
That's not socialism, that's a country with social services. I've seen multiple time when people from Scandinavia were offended when their country was called "socialist" - they are not. The economy is capitalist but the country offers strong social services.
Another funny thing - when reading about the us you realizer that it's just a broken market and snowballed problems. For example - the government invests more than any other country (per capita) in the health sector. The thing is it got out of hand.
Can? Yes. Do they? Probably not.
You can go the NCD route and actively send a response (in their case it really was justified as the sub should have been nsfw to begin with), but in the end they also folded.
There's a dissonance between allowing complete freedom without intervention and keeping the market truly free - if an organisation can simply buy all it's competition and expand forever, that's just a monopoly which is a closed market.
As for socialism - I grew up in a kibbutz, which is one of the only examples a successful socialist system (imo). And this too, is time limited. My reasoning being having a small group where everyone know each other and decide to join of their own volition. Most kibbutzim failed after the 3rd generation - people did not want to share anymore (and took some very bad financial decisions).