argument top image

Should we break up the Big Tech companies?
Back to question

Big Tech monopolies stifle innovation

Big Tech has disincentivized essential investment into new technology enterprises.
< (3 of 3) Next argument >

The Argument

The availability of capital for new tech start-ups has declined since the rise of Big Tech, and growth of innovative new businesses has slowed. The availability of investment capital to start-ups is contingent upon investors' confidence in the potential of new enterprises to generate large returns on investment by increasing the company's value well beyond its worth at the time of investment. Big Tech companies dampen this confidence by preventing start-ups from growing past a point where they become targets for acquisition (or decimation) by Big Tech. Consequently, it has become harder for new tech companies to secure venture capital since Big Tech began to dominate the technology industry. Both the prevalence of young tech companies and the proportion of high-growth young tech companies have declined steeply since 2000. U.S. start-ups have slumped and productivity growth has slowed since 2005, and financing rounds for tech start-ups have become significantly scarcer since 2012.

Counter arguments


[P1] Since the rise of Big Tech, the amount of high-growth new tech companies has declined dramatically. [P2] Breaking up the Big Tech companies would re-invigorate innovation.

Rejecting the premises


This page was last edited on Thursday, 16 Jul 2020 at 17:43 UTC

Explore related arguments