Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.panix2.panix.com!panix2.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: My Dinner With Marc Andreessen
Date: 6 Jul 2024 13:28:36 -0000
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <v6bgq4$oc5$1@panix2.panix.com>
References: <slrnv85b2k.1pv.bencollver@svadhyaya.localdomain> <335ed481-557d-7d19-949a-fadba2016d2f@example.net> <v69fbp$3d8jk$1@dont-email.me> <fceb74f9-2c99-98f2-7773-f8d07b7bbc56@example.net>
Injection-Info: reader1.panix.com; posting-host="panix2.panix.com:166.84.1.2";
	logging-data="21841"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
Bytes: 1502

D  <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>They are. One sentence says that free markets become oligopolies (which is 
>not true) while the other says that government regulated markets (non-free 
>markets) become oligopolies.

But they BOTH can become oligopolies.

>Either free markets create them, or non-free markets. If both create them, 
>this discussion is meaningless. Needless to say, I do not believe so, but 
>if someone does believe it, I see no point in continuing talking.

The natural state of the system is oligopoly.  A government can resist this,
or it can accelerate it.   This is why a government controlled by an informed
electorate is so important.
--scott

-- 
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."