in what way is buying a competitor not inherently anti-competitive?
If someone has a history of anti-competitive behavior, preventing them from buying competitors is perfectly logical
in what way is buying a competitor not inherently anti-competitive?
If someone has a history of anti-competitive behavior, preventing them from buying competitors is perfectly logical
Nope. Wasted questions on animal/plant/mineral when that paradigm isn’t accurate enough for a machine I guess.
Seemed to understand alive vs not.
Now its just the kids aging into mario kart abilities, like my niece who just asked for this for her bday
Ah yes, the nuanced thinking of a 5 year old - everything is black and white and everyone who doesn’t agree w me 100% is evil
Then please point to the original aggression
When do you start the timeline though? The Palestine / Israel conflict has been going for 100 years right? Are you comfy saying Israel is the original aggressor?
Full disclosure: I dislike all fundamentalist religious societies. I don’t believe in holy land, and I think people on both sides are reaping what they’ve sown by insisting they are gods chosen people. So I’m not defending Israel, but I’m not defending Palestine (and especially Hamas) either.
Yeah the quality of my Healthcare is decreasing
Microsoft would kill Nintendo so quickly. I think they could do it in 10 years tops, shadow of its former self
I freaking hate that Zuk got Oculus. Made my first VR helmet freaking worthless. Forced a facebook account to play my games I already bought.
Just went ahead and shelled out for the Index after that, cause at least you know Gabe isn’t fucking around.
If I own shares through a vanguard index, can I vote in each of those companies?
If so, how?
Someone could make a tool to make it quick and easy
I’m not on twitter and never was, but I’m not silly enough to think billionaires don’t shape my world in a million fucking ways with their unilateral decisions. Elon here has a HUGE one recently in deciding to disable starlink during a Ukraine offensive.
Trying to assist his rich buddies with fucking with the union is a lower tier crime but still its fuckery that affects a lot of people.
Then we’ve got other rich asshats selling state secrets for money.
Billionaires are a liability and everyone needs to realize it.
Somewhere an Elon fanboy is explaining why this is peak free speech
it agrees with me that there will be more violence, including terrorism. No idea what you’re talking about with this ‘feelings based’ argument. Rich people’s desire for more money is also feelings-based, it doesn’t change the fact that it has cause and effect associated.
Thats not all it says. Income inequality and all violence are linked, including terrorism https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2766910
Its not a threat, its a feature of the system https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15817728/#:~:text=The most well-established environmental,tend to be more violent.
the ultra rich are betting they can stay above the fray, but if you’re mid rich you’re going to have to buy a bunch of security equipment and isolate yourself from society more.
Flat wrong, homes can still appreciate over time, you don’t need 20% every 2 -3 years to be a ‘nest egg’.
Housing regulations have failed to control foreign investors and airBNBs, its not locally controlled at all.
And nothing you said addressed the coming violence from a massive unhoused population with nothing to lose.
Its scarcity because a tiny percentage of the population is holding a bunch of houses as an investment chip, not for shelter.
Societies everywhere have to decide: do you want people housed, do you want a few rich assholes? Hint: one leads to a more stable society than the other
wealth inequality is only growing so violence will increase at this rate
your grandparents probably bought a house that young. Ask them how long they had to rent.
I use Firefox with ad blockers to watch YouTube. Chrome seems to be allowing them to block my ad blocker