Oh hey, just keep in mind I'm not pursuing this to win an argument or change your mind or anything. I find it interesting. By ruthlessly crushing your competition, here is what I mean: * Maximize sales - hire sales people and directly go after every customer available even if it means going after all of your competitions clients. Customers are now aware of more choice. * Minimize what you charge - Perhaps you see potential for economies of scale that your competition has not done their homework on and you think that if you lower prices you can corner the market and drive your competition out of business. Perhaps you see a segmentation opportunity and understand that an industry that is ONLY providing the option for high cost / high quality is underserving customers and there may be customers that want to pay very little for lower quality offerings. In the latter case the customers have more options and are better matched to a solution they want instead of forced into expensive product / service, in the first option the customers still buy the same number of services or products but pay less saving them money while you still have to hire the same number of people. * You do your homework and arrange for better financing terms or you arrange favourable deals with vendors and infrastructure segments of the economy in return for bringing them more business. You gain more customers, you hire more people, your partners get more business your less effective competitors that did not do their homework go out of business. No law was broken, no one was hurt. All that happened is a super competitor entered a marketplace of a bunch of lazy fat fish and took control where the lazy fat fish were just comfortable. I don't think that is evil. I think we may be actually talking about different things. The problem with the complaint about super competitors (people that do nothing but devote their lives to being super competitors in any particular industry) is fairly just and I kind of agree with you. I mean, I hate the fact everyone CHOOSES to buy Microsoft and I hate that people choose to shop at walmart and amazon and I wish people would make better choices. But, it is hard for me to argue that those companies giving their customers exactly what they want is evil. I agree, we now are living through huge problems because we allowed a few people to end up with most of the wealth and those people have no alliegence to borders or genetic groupings of people and are selling us all down the line. I recognize that this is the sideffect of people like me pursuing the purity of the competitition is not evil argument. What I am driving at is that the problem problem with labeling super competition as evil is that we now have to ask question like, if it is evil should super competitors chose to be lazy and do as poor a job as their competition? Should the stop actually trying to do the best work they can and instead do worse work just in order to not evil? Obviously, humans cannot do this, it doesn't make sense. You are either a super producer / competitor or you are lazy and / or stupid. There is no such thing as a smart person dumbing them selves down to not be evil because they are smarter and they can do a better job cheaper than a dumb person. Instead, what happens is that people recognize the problem but don't understand it at a sufficient level of resolution and start implementing policies that drive innovation into the ground in order to stamp out evil. This is exactly what we are seeing with the sjws. They are tearing our western nations apart in an attempt to IMPOSE justice from above for a percieved issue they can neither understand nor comprehend at the right levels of resolution. In fact, this is EXACTLY how communism was foisted on the slavic nations, exact same process different context. My position is that there can never be a value judgement put on super producers and super competitors because this make no sense. They are just better in some or many ways than those they outcompete. As to how we address the super concentration of wealth udner a few people that don't have our best interest, I don't know. What I do know is that the opposite side of that argument, the one you are pointing to leads to communism and all communists and socialists must be removed from society.