These are *current* solutions (assuming they all work, which I'll grant you for the argument). But my point is that no matter what these solutions are, the more capable+antisocial/sociopathic actors *always* get around them, using the power they accumulate/concentrate.
And as long as there is freedom to contract, people will sell away their self-sufficiency, bit by bit, to those centralizing actors who will have the advantages of efficiencies of scale.
As long as we have freedom to contract, we will end up with centralized hierarchies, not by design, but by individual choices.
I'm definitely in favor of society considering people's lives over institutions, but economies of scale is about increasing resources under a single agency. There is no single "consumer" (either in the modern term sense of
These are *current* solutions (assuming they all work, which I'll grant you for the argument). But my point is that no matter what these solutions are, the more capable+antisocial/sociopathic actors *always* get around them, using the power they accumulate/concentrate.
And as long as there is freedom to contract, people will sell away their self-sufficiency, bit by bit, to those centralizing actors who will have the advantages of efficiencies of scale.
As long as we have freedom to contract, we will end up with centralized hierarchies, not by design, but by individual choices.
What about the advantages of efficiencies of scale to the consumer?
I'm definitely in favor of society considering people's lives over institutions, but economies of scale is about increasing resources under a single agency. There is no single "consumer" (either in the modern term sense of
the word or more generally).