I'm not saying this is a failure of the system, only that it is the system. My overall point is that systems take the form they do based on available technology, efficiencies of production, lines of communication, and incentives, and that the individual firms involved are disposable actors that are forced by the factors above into economically-rational actions. If the natural form of an industry is monopoly (as most "blue team" industries are), that's what we'll get, and government action can at best delay it.

▲

kibwen 4 days ago | parent [-]

Sure, but this is making the common mistake of viewing government intervention as being somehow separate or outside of the market system, rather than being inside the system. Corporations in a competitive market consolidate to the point of monopoly, they use that monopoly to abuse customers, customers demand their governments intervene, some measure of competitiveness is restored, goto start. This is the system.

	▲	nostrademons 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		That's a fair way of looking at it. Bringing it back to the article's point, the government is part of the "blue team" portion of the system. In that if they don't do their job, and their job includes complex regulations that balance multiple competing factors, then large portions of the system...well, "collapse" is a judgy term, but "function in significantly different ways" gets the point across. Inaction or ineffectiveness of the government effectively creates new "blue team" industries, and distributes power in different ways across the economy.