Comment by sooheon
11 hours ago
This is misuse of language. Rent seeking is anti-competitive by definition. The current system, as far as it encourages and rewards rent seeking, is anti-capitalist.
11 hours ago
This is misuse of language. Rent seeking is anti-competitive by definition. The current system, as far as it encourages and rewards rent seeking, is anti-capitalist.
Getting into a position where you can tilt the playing field exclusively in your benefit is 100% the logical outcome of for-profit companies in capitalism.
It’s so transparently and frequently stated outright, that building companies geared around achieving that has become the norm: it is the fundamental business-model of _every_ _single_ unicorn startup, or the company that buys them. Launch, squeeze out competitors by relying on VC money, capture the market, and become the sole dominant force in that market and use your position to then pull up the ladder behind you and cement your position. Uber and Facebook are prime examples of this.
It isn't.
Both perfectly competitive markets and monopolistic markets are part of the broad term capitalism.
Capital consolidates over time and seeks to influence policy-makers to create anti-competitive regulations.
Every single time.
Anticompetitive behavior is completely within lines for capitalism. Survival of the fittest and efficient marketplace and all that.
Besides, what's the other option, rent seeking is socialism? A barter system?
If monopolies are "non capitalistic", then why has every capitalist economy in history had such a tendency towards creating large monopolies? The same cab certainly not be said any those economies producing, say, worker control of the means of production.
Every economy tends towards monopoly because people like power and will corrupt and exploit any system to gain abd hold it.
That's a human problem.
Nice and did humans create these markets or were they emitted by the sun?
Just like communism practice is not communism in theory.