@LisaKalayji I believe you mean "cronyism". What do you think holds others back from competing in this space? Moderna, Pfizer...these companies do not have a monopoly on information or effective technology. They DO have something much more effective; permission from the government to sell you something. The government are the ones controlling what you're allowed to put into your own body, and who you can buy it from.
@AlexanderKingsbury @LisaKalayji they do have a monopoly on the information/technology that is required to make their vaccine. Patents.
So much of the information is public. They don't have a monopoly on that.
They DO have a government enforced monopoly on *use of* that information, and that's what we should be reevaluating, the circumstances in which government should offer to enforce such monopolies.
@AlexanderKingsbury @LisaKalayji@sfba.social
@volkris Indeed. But this is like stating: "this is caused by us having laws". Not particularly insightful. The much more interesting point is that the idea which has led to this kind of legislation is that information should be treated as a form of private property in some ways. This has led to patents, copyright and trademarks.
@73ms ha, I half agree, but I think you skated past the important point:
This is caused by us having laws *both created and enforced by individuals that we elected and continue to elect*.
I DO want to zero in on "this is caused by us having laws" because that's the key to improving things.
We keep reelecting the people who promote that, and the solution is for us to stop doing that.
That we have laws is the problem. That we elect better people is the solution.
So it's vital to realize that this is all up to the population in the end.
