Trump tweet:

It is my Great Honor to report that the United States of America now fully owns and controls 10% of INTEL, a Great American Company that has an even more incredible future. I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan, the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The United States paid nothing for these Shares, and the Shares are now valued at approximately $11 Billion Dollars. This is a great Deal for America and, also, a great Deal for INTEL. Building leading edge Semiconductors and Chips, which is what INTEL does, is fundamental to the future of our Nation. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Thank you for your attention to this matter.

  • Zorque@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    Functionally, there’s no such thing. In a system that gives the most power to the company that makes the most money, that company will seek to maximize its profits. Part of maximizing profits is eliminating competition. So in a “free” market, the most successful will subvert the freedom of their competition thus eliminating the freedom in the market.

    Self-correction in a market is an illusion crafted people either desperate to salvage a broken system, or those who seek to exploit them.

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      That’s why free market is how we call a market where anti-monopoly laws exist, work and are enforced in full.

      While what you are talking about isn’t called market, it’s called jungle.

      Self-correction in a market is an illusion crafted people either desperate to salvage a broken system, or those who seek to exploit them.

      Self-correction exists when anti-monopoly laws exist, work and are enforced in full. It doesn’t exist when they don’t, because self-correction relies upon competition providing a choice and the consumer using it.

      Also trade unions and customer associations are part of what we call free market. Both are voluntary, in public interest, and work when they exist. No coercion involved, thus no violation of market laws.

      Also on large enough scale of the market and small enough scale of all businesses it may sometimes seem, that anti-monopoly laws are not needed. Especially since when anti-monopoly laws work, the market appears such.