[arkades]

Maybe? Kind of?

I'm extremely pro-capitalism, but free market economics does rely on a number of assumptions being met in order to function, and only maximizes utility functions for those participating.

If you build a market that violates those assumptions (e.g., massive consolidation of supply) and effectively excludes people from participating (by reducing total volume of work amenable to human intervention), capitalism ... just doesn't work. Wrong tool for the job.

Traditionally we either regulate operations to make them better fit free market assumptions, or regulate outcomes. Whether that looks like communism is a secondary discussion, though if you consolidate supply heavily enough, then yes, you end up with some central supplier choosing what to produce and how to allocate it for all those people that have no resources to create meaningful demand.

[eb3c90]

I think we can make supply distributed (given micro manufacturing/recycling etc) so even if it is less efficient for a community to do it than something more centralised they still have some autonomy. See my profile for my website if you are interested where I am coming from.

[arkades]

I meant centralized in terms of ownership/control, not geographic placement. The current trend towards winner-take-all automation and resultant oligarchy.

[eb3c90]

So do I. Consider the technological extreme of open source manufacturing. A set of tools like repraps, that that can really make themselves (and computers etc)