• iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    Well as long as they are independent businesses, why shouldn’t they?

    If your argument seems to be “they are too crucial to be independent businesses,” I don’t think we’d disagree too much, but the fact is that they are right now.

    • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t think that businesses, not being individuals, should actually have the same rights as individuals I guess. I don’t really agree with the idea that a corporation should be able to do whatever it likes by default, simply because I think corporations in general have too much power to be trusted with such.

      • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Come on, that’s a bit of a stawman because I’m not in any way suggesting that businesses should be able to do whatever they like.

        • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          It was more like hyperbole on my part, I was using that as a catch all for whatever kinds of things a business could abuse it’s position by doing. I didn’t want to just say “be able to do businesses or not do business with whoever they want”, because I wanted to say something more broad than just applying to payment processors, even if choosing not to do business with someone and thereby shutting them out of much of the economy is the way a payment processor would do this .