It's not a crime if we do it with an app

Apps, “disruption,” and law‑breaking

• Long debate over whether companies like Uber and Airbnb are fundamentally different from earlier “disruptors” (YouTube, Netflix, Tesla, Craigslist, eBay, Ford).
• One side: Uber/Airbnb’s business model required ignoring existing taxi/hotel laws; YouTube et al mostly faced secondary issues (user piracy) and complied with takedown laws.
• Others argue that early YouTube and similar services actively benefited from infringement to grow, so they too “broke rules first, asked forgiveness later.”
• Some see Uber as a net positive (better service, lower DUIs, break taxi medallion cartels); others say ends don’t justify illegal tactics or regulatory arbitrage.

Algorithmic cartels and Potatotrac‑style tools

• Core concern: pricing/analytics platforms (for frozen potatoes, rent, etc.) act as coordination hubs so a few dominant firms can move prices in lockstep.
• Supporters of this view say that when 3–4 firms control ~97% of a commodity and all use the same pricing app, this is effectively a cartel, just with software as a smokescreen.
• Skeptics note some cited markets are highly competitive and low‑margin, and lawsuits are still pending; some question whether the “cartel” framing is overblown.

Monopolies, antitrust, and regulation

• Many commenters argue modern capitalism naturally drifts toward oligopoly; antitrust enforcement and merger blocking are seen as insufficient or too slow.
• Discussion of recent US antitrust efforts: some praise renewed enforcement; others say impact on big tech and large mergers has been modest.
• Disagreement over whether price regulation is “disaster” or necessary for natural monopolies/oligopolies.

Corporate crime vs individual crime

• Strong sentiment that corporations are treated leniently: small fines, no jail, rare “corporate death penalty,” contrasted with harsh treatment for petty individual crime.
• Debate over limited liability and the “corporate veil”: originally to spread risk, now seen as shielding large firms and executives from meaningful consequences.
• Proposals range from massive fines and forced stock dilution to jailing senior decision‑makers or large shareholders; others warn this is unworkable or would punish ordinary retirees.

Competition, “ethical” firms, and barriers to entry

• Repeated question: if incumbents overcharge, why don’t more ethical, lower‑margin competitors win?
• Answers raised: economies of scale, vertical integration, control of distribution/retail, regulatory barriers, access to capital, and incumbents’ ability to undercut or buy out entrants.
• Some argue cultural and structural incentives ensure “less greedy” firms are selected out at scale.

Inflation, money supply, and “greedflation”

• Part of the thread attributes price hikes mainly to corporate power and algorithmic collusion (“greedflation”).
• Others insist increased money supply, supply shocks (e.g., pandemics, wars), and standard supply–demand dynamics are major drivers; they criticize ignoring monetary policy.
• Overall: consensus that multiple forces interact, but disagreement on which is primary.