Message from @Tonight at 11 - DOOM
Discord ID: 609548178223530000
This is a SHORT list of problems with laissez faire
that I have literally never heard anyone address to my satisfaction
both the confederates and the union issued their own notes
You know what we should be doing
Laughing at people that advocate for a "free market"
Because they're clearly stupid.
I'm unironically for a rather free market, but full on laissez faire is obvious bananas
It's meme tier
some markets in some fields can maybe be laissez faire, but not the entire economy
The involvement of the state is not only preferred, but is necessary in certain areas / ways
To ensure the consumer, environment or state isn't negatively effected
the problem is large companies use their market power to muscle out smaller competitors to maintain their monopoly/duopoly
that is one of the problems, yes
Hence the issue we have today.
google, to go back to that example, is an INCREDIBLE intelligence and general military asset. Allowing it to do whatever it wants is just madness.
**Nationalise it**
really, the US would be wise declare it a utility and to buy it out.
damn it, ninjaed me
there is a problem with that
Lower the voting age more for idiots, that doesn't understand politics...
| > Dem logic #101.
And people wonders why politics is so fucked.
~~~
Andrew Yang Wants to Lower Voting Age to 16
> https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/03/andrew-yang-wants-to-lower-voting-age-to-16/
a significant part of the long term value of Google is the fact that it is bleeding edge. State owned shit never is.
And just taking that hit is risky considering 🇨🇳
Depends on the way it's managed
Canadian Identity: Ending Official Multiculturalism and Preserving Canadian Values and Culture
> https://www.peoplespartyofcanada.ca/canadian_identity_ending_official_multiculturalism_and_preserving_canadian_values_and_culture
It could simply have its rules / TOS managed by a government entity
ye no, the free market ppl are correct in saying that state run shit is never as competitive with FEW exceptions
It could have some areas split off
rules TOS shure
but das not nationalization
So Alphabet can't own Youtube, Google, etc
das just legislation
It is, in a sense
You wouldn't be bringing all of it into public ownership
it's saying: this is what companies in this field can and cannot do
specifically: this is the only thing they are allowed to do with their TOS
Trump Executive Order Ending Social Media Censorship Has Tech Companies Outraged
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuTP9CV4Tk
Tim "Trump good" Pool
It wouldn't be "legislation" per say.
Tim "his hatless head is a portal to hell" Pool
I was thinking, a government council sits and decides these rules
It would also be able to adapt and change them quickly