rchive

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The efficient solution to that problem is governments using a different platform that's actually neutral. The government has full control over where they host their videos. Using that as a reason to TRY (a likely long and drawn out process) to force Google to change its policies company-wide is silly.

I'm not being disingenuous. I watch videos on a bunch of platforms. It's easy.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (4 children)

No, not really. Google can't do anything about my taking my Firefox browser and watching videos from somewhere else. There are countless other video streaming services.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

That's less restrictive than what I said. McDonald's won't let you bring tacos in at all, doesn't just make you wait at the door for 2 minutes, etc.

Edit: and to anyone quibbling with my McDonald's example saying you can in fact bring tacos in, that was just an illustration. I can find plenty of examples of one establishment not letting people bring food in from somewhere else.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (13 children)

Is it more anti competitive than McDonald's only selling McDonald's burgers or preventing you from bringing Taco Bell tacos in from outside?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The current US Federal Trade Commission is quite agressive compared to other FTCs historically.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Amazon is very much not a monopoly. There are thousands of online retailers. There are also a lot of delivery services, no idea if there are thousands, but there's a lot.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's basically a business owner guild, right?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

econ students love them.

Why?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's kind of true in some parts of the US, indirectly. Some places criminalize not being homeless but all the things that are the result of being homeless like sleeping outside or in public places. But there are a lot of places in the US that do provide for the homeless. New York City has a right to housing provision, for example.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Is there a country that you'd consider a good example of this?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Where did this meme of "capitalism requires infinite growth, therefore it's impossible and bad" come from? Capitalism doesn't require infinite growth, the universe has basically infinite resources, modernity which is largely but not exclusively caused by capitalism has allowed us to do so much more with fewer resources than generations previous, and as societies get richer in material wealth they produce fewer children and have the luxury to pay attention to things like the environment and their impact on it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, that's what I meant. Lol. Thanks for correcting

view more: next ›