• ripcord@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Do they legally have an obligation to care for that? I’m still not understanding what would make this even remotely likely to succeed.

    • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      This explains it well. Shareholder primacy isnt that old even. Stakeholder primacy used to be the norm and according to this article should also be the future goal.

      So yes, this works very well and has so in the past. The current model of infinite growth is unsustainable both physically and environmentally.

    • Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Nothing. It’s a pretty fantasy. Best I think we can hope for is a few monopolies busted up so some little guys can break into the market. That’ll buy us about 20 years until those little guys have become the new Googles and Microsofts and Apples, and then we start over. We need to entirely rewrite how we do antitrust assessments to account for both vertical and horizontal monopolistic behaviors (a vertical monopoly is a company that controls the entire supply chain where a horizontal one controls the market and customer base. Historically, the US has been more concerned with horizontal monopolies.) It’d be great if we could come up with a better measure of consumer choice that we currently use. If you have the choice between 2 ISPs but they both charge the same amount for the same service, you don’t really have a choice there…at least not a meaningful one.