Da Contemporary Politics thread Vol. now 100% echo chamber free!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course it’s not going to be free to do something digitally, but the point is it is no longer being controlled by a bunch of people in Texas.
The monopoly of Silicon Valley over the internet suggests otherwise.

Furthermore, because money buys exposure on the internet, you can expect the same wealthy donors who control the Texas Board of Education to be very visible online.

Also,

Whoever controls the medium controls the message.

If you shape the message, you don't need to filter the contents of the medium.
 
The monopoly of Silicon Valley over the internet suggests otherwise.

Furthermore, because money buys exposure on the internet, you can expect the same wealthy donors who control the Texas Board of Education to be very visible online.

Also,



If you shape the message, you don't need to filter the contents of the medium.
So what do you suggest is the solution to this problem?
 
Who is shaping the messages you disagree with and why?

Who is shaping the messages you agree with and why?
 
So what do you suggest is the solution to this problem?

In short, do what they do in other nations that are achieving higher rates of literacy, math proficiency, etc... than we do. In 1990, we were the 6th most educated nation. In 2016, we were 26th.

Yeah it’s actually shocking that there is not a textbook alternative company.

It's not. When unregulated market forces dictate everything, money becomes the great regulator, and the poorer actors are forced to close shop.

It's real-life Monopoly.
 
In short, do what they do in other nations that are achieving higher rates of literacy, math proficiency, etc... than we do. In 1990, we were the 6th most educated nation. In 2016, we were 26th.



It's not. When unregulated market forces dictate everything, money becomes the great regulator, and the poorer actors are forced to close shop.

It's real-life Monopoly.
What exactly are other countries doing that America can use to improve its system?

Not saying you are wrong but that statement is so general that it’s almost meaningless. When talking about these issues and their solutions you need to be specific.

Money is only a great regulator when it can buy political influence to create regulation and keep competition out of the market.
 
Okay so I looked up this Texas textbook thing and it seems to be a myth. I’m not finding anything about it. I remember my high school textbooks (California) and they definitely didn’t seem like some sort of backwards Texas written books. Any sources on this?

Also, our problem as a nation is not our K-12 as much as it is our 0 to 3 years old inequity. The brain of a kid from 0-3 develops the majority of who/what they’ll be (80% of adult brain). There is a huge variation of what kids get at that age (eg single parent, little vocab exposure, etc) that put kids so far behind even before they start school.
 
What exactly are other countries doing that America can use to improve its system?

Not saying you are wrong but that statement is so general that it’s almost meaningless. When talking about these issues and their solutions you need to be specific.

Money is only a great regulator when it can buy political influence to create regulation and keep competition out of the market.
Have you looked into the way education is structured in places that are rated better than the US?

Why would I need to buy political influence to drive competitors out of the market if I can:

- fight them by lowering prices (because I can afford losses that they can't)
- buy them out
?
 
Have you looked into the way education is structured in places that are rated better than the US?

Why would I need to buy political influence to drive competitors out of the market if I can:

- fight them by lowering prices (because I can afford losses that they can't)
- buy them out
?
I live in Canada and have been paid by local high schools to consult on developing tech education, does that count?

Because it is cheaper to lobby and it’s the only way to maintain a monopoly in the long run which is why every major company spends considerable amounts of money on political donations.

In a true free market there will always be a constant stream of new competition. Do you expect a big company to opporate at a loss to drive these businesses out forever? How long will that last them?

Companies have a choice of being bought out or not. How does a major company who’s aim is to maximize profit afford buying out every competitor that arrives on the market when the competitors get to set their own price point for how much they will sell for?

These ideas don’t make much economic sense.
 
We have a real life monopoly here in B.C, it’s called our auto insurance industry and it is over priced and just all around awful.
 
Companies have a choice of being bought out or not. How does a major company who’s aim is to maximize profit afford buying out every competitor that arrives on the market when the competitors get to set their own price point for how much they will sell for?
Ask Facebook?

In a true free market there will always be a constant stream of new competition. Do you expect a big company to opporate at a loss to drive these businesses out forever? How long will that last them?
Ask Uber/Lyft/Walmart/Amazon?
 
None of those are monopolies. How are you going to list Uber and Lyft as an example of an monopoly?

What is stopping someone creating a better platform for ridesharing and taking away Uber’s market share?

Is Walmart the only place you can shop?

Ironically Walmart is one of the biggest lobbiests in America.
 
Facebook and social media in general is an interesting economic case study because it’s product quality is directly linked to how close to an monopoly it is.
 
its my job to know, i work in da field...:lol:
lithium is a rare material that is skyrocketing in cost, and already hit its ceiling in
regards to current battery tech...if da market doesnt find a better alternative that can
match da density of energy gasoline has, and be scaled up to compete, you'll be pumping
gas as long as you walk this Earth.
Essentially....

We live in a capitalist society, Exxon doesn't invest in green energy yet because it's not good for business.
 
The energy sector is not exactly a free market with all the subsidies oil and gas gets.
 
The energy sector is not exactly a free market with all the subsidies oil and gas gets.
Please do tell me which sector is exactly a free market....
Not to mention all the subsidies green energy did and still receives....
 
What is stopping someone creating a better platform for ridesharing and taking away Uber’s market share?
At this point, it would have to be something completely different than what Uber is, or it would have to be an already existing company with a large budget for software development.
 
At this point, it would have to be something completely different than what Uber is, or it would have to be an already existing company with a large budget for software development.
For sure, and that’s just the nature of innovation. Uber already has its top competitor in Lyft and there are also the rental car apps where you can drive your self. Or you can go old school and get a taxi. Point is it’s far from a monopoly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom