So hear me out. If there’s a company that’s willing to invest in controlling everything, and is willing and able to handle it at a reasonable cost for the consumer, then it should be allowed. It’s not like it’s any different today anyway. You have these super corporations that own the smaller corporations that handle various industries. Take Johnson & Johnson for example. They 275 subsidiaries. Meaning that J&J get money for every new product that occurs in the subsidiaries. You don’t even know some of the things they’re involved with.

And stunning number for a company is Nestlé which has around 2000 subsidiaries. So what’s the point of anti monopoly laws anymore? They found a way, so why should they be allowed to hide who they own? The everyday Joe and Jane have already figured out that things aren’t the way they appear, so I think we’re on the cusp of a full truth era where subsidiaries are going to start being involved in monopolization. These companies skirted the truth for too long, and we as individual citizens should put focus on and shut down subsidiaries

  • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    I mean, I don’t get a say in it. By some very minor factor one may argue that I vote with my dollar, but there are so many mitigating factors with regards to the intentionality of that vote, such as pricing and availability. Furthermore, as you pointed out, the monopolies are obfuscated. Maybe I swear to never buy a Nestlé product, but I’m unaware of every one of their subsidiaries and I don’t keep track of their acquisitions.

    Perhaps monopolies would be less egregious if the companies had the public good as their ultimate goal, but that will never happen as long as we have a society built around profit seeking.