u/Acceptable_Map_8110

I was on the r/presidents subreddit the other day, and the question asked was about whether or not Clinton’s deregulation was a good or a bad thing(something along those lines anyway). One of the top comments was about businesses being trustworthy only in the fact that they care little about consumer’s interest. My response was that businesses need to consumer interest in order to make a profit, as if consumers aren’t interested then they wont buy the firms products, and if that happens, the firm goes out of business or is outcompeted. This was not a particularly popular comment, and generally was met with statements ranging from the view that there isn’t really any actual market competition and that most markets are overstated with cartels/monopolies, and that businesses simply don’t care about consumer interest.

My question here, then, is to ascertain whether or not businesses actually care about consumer interest, and to discern whether or not most markets are operating under monopoly or competition.

All of the major genius scientists in DC vs all of the major geniuses in Marvel! Who wins?

On team DC we have:

1. Batman
2. Lex Luthor
3. Mr. Terrific
4. Ted Kord
   And 5. Brainiac

On team Marvel we have

1. Doctor Doom
2. Reed Richards
3. Iron Man
4. Black Panther
   And 5: Hank Pym

Alright all of the smart folks are here and they’ve got all of their resources at their disposal, they can use their most powerful suits, weapons, or tech to bring to the fight, and they all work together for 1 month to prep for their fight against the other team.

Who will come out on top?

Seriously, I mean you had troll hunters(which is super underrated), Voltron, She-ra and the princess of power, The Dragon Prince, Miltons vs the Machines, Hilda, and so many other exceptional shows. That’s not even mentioning adult animation like Blood of Zeus(which I think is underrated), and of course legendary pieces of animation like Castlevania, Love Death and Robots, and of course Arcanne.

Mind you we have all of this yet Netflix very clearly doesn’t pay much attention to animation. So just imagine if it actually cared and didn’t cancel animated shows with tremendous potential after only a few seasons(like they unforgivingly did with Inside Job). I feel like they have one of the best animation studious in the world, yet they don’t really pay much attention to them or give them the funding that they need. Personally I think Netflix and other animation studios like it could routinely produce masterpieces of animation, yet don’t because of poor business decisions. I wish it could be better ya know…and I want inside job back.

Seriously, I mean not only did he hate slavery yet owned slaves, which is easily one of his most famous hypocrisy’s, but he was also anti-central banks yet he was a shareholder in the first chartered bank in the nations history.

It’s insane how he could believe one thing in principle but then do a completely separate thing in practice.

Often in hypothetical fights between characters who are much weaker and characters who are much stronger, people will say that the weaker character will win if they have sufficient hax abilities. For instance in a fight between Paul Atreides vs Superman someone might say that Paul could win via the voice(I’ve never heard or read this being said anywhere, but it’s an example).

Now Paul is far far weaker than Superman, but because he has a hax ability that Superman can’t counter(lets say for the sake of this question that Superman can’t counter it with hax or proven resistance or something akin to that), some might say he would win.

So my question is, what is the extent by which a character who is significantly weaker than the character they are fighting can win that fight via hax?