this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2024
1238 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

59594 readers
3399 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 86 points 3 months ago (7 children)

How about we start restricting how many businesses a company is allowed to buy out in a year. Maybe allow like 1-2 mergers a year. There no reason we should allow one company to buy everyone and then kill their products and services leaving the consumers holding the bag that will no longer function because the server is gone.

[–] bizarroland@fedia.io 48 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I would say even one a year would be too much.

That unless the business has failed and is no longer operating, for a merger and acquisition to occur they would have to petition the courts for permission first.

Imagine the shit that Microsoft and Google and Adobe and Amazon would be doing if they had to start their companies from scratch and compete against the already extant players in the field?

It would create so many jobs, and create an excess of consumer choice opportunity, lowering prices and fighting against inflation far more than a couple of percentage points on the interest rate index ever would.

I'm tired of only being offered incredibly overpriced very shitty low quality options in every single category.

We don't need $100,000 cars. We need $5,000 cars.

We don't need $1,000,000 homes, we need $25,000 homes that anyone in America who works a full-time job regardless of if they're slinging fries at McDonald's or digging ditches can afford.

We don't need $100 a week grocery bills. We need $5 a week grocery bills.

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 months ago

Your arguments are all invalid because capitalism

(I fully agree with your post, I sorry the world is shit)

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 1 points 3 months ago

We don’t need $100,000 cars. We need $5,000 cars

A lot of this cost is in materials, quality control and safety testing, plus requirements by trade agreements for where components are allowed to be manufactured and assembled

We don’t need $1,000,000 homes, we need $25,000 homes

Most of this cost is land. A tiny home can be self built for a few thousand, and starts at ~20k professionally built, and a small, say 800 sq foot house that someone might actually want to live in can generally be built for under 100k.

Most houses aren't worth that much but the land under them is. So more townhouses, duplexes and smaller lots, smaller lawns and a lot more apartments and condos will help

[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 38 points 3 months ago

One thing that I've always found interesting is that silicon valley has a common start up strategy that is basically: do well enough to get bought buy your bigger competition. Basically, be a threat so your VCs can cash in when a Google, Facebook, etc buys you.

I'm other words, Silicon Valley has a start up culture that feeds an anticompetitive/anti-trust ecosystem. No one complains because they are all making money. It's the users who slowly suffer and we end up were we are not with 5 companies running the modern web and Internet infrastructure.

[–] ScreaminOctopus@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 months ago

Buyouts shouldn't be allowed by default. The only cases where it should be allowed are when the business being bought out is struggling to the point where a buyout is really the only way to prevent bankruptcy. It should never be a good deal for the selling company and only a last resort to stop closing doors completely.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

Buying out companies takes longer than a year usually.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

Can I vote for YOU for president?

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Ah yes, but you see, the US government only cares about faceless corporations, business owners and other rich people, and not about the average citizen, sorry. In fact, I would argue most governments are like this.

[–] KittyCat@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I'd go further, restrict the market cap for businesses so they have to spin off if they get too big. Add to that a value limit for the number of boards you can sit on so 30 companies can't be controlled by the same people.