She begins with the usual appeal to rigor with pointing out the dynamics of the system; but then she leaves out the failures in the early 20th century. She left out the stock market crash and the Great Depression. She didn't even try to address the crisis cycle. Then she goes on with the typical free market dogma. She's suggesting that intervention can turn things around and get competition and horizontal growth going again, but she doesn't address the issues that brought aggregation about in the first place. Most people can't see past the cash register. They want more money in their pocket from their current paycheck. Natural distributions dictate what complex, self-organizing systems are structured like. Only a small percentage of the population is likely to have interest and aptitude for economics and finance. The rest are going to choose the lower price. Corporations are more efficient in distribution. That's why they keep winning. That's why the crisis cycle keeps happening. Aggregation provides the resources to deal with large issues as they come. This is one of the paradoxes that exists in monetary economics.
Corporations are more competitive; just not in a Smithian sense. From conception to success, there is no model that can compete. The issue arises when the markets are saturated and the company can no longer secure dividends for it's investors. The problem isn't really with the corporate model on its own. The problem is with capital creating capital gains. That is where the stock market comes in. That's where the real aggregation occurs. That's where the currency magically reproduces without a product or service. Providing currency as a service makes no economic sense. It devalues the currency; because the capital gains cannot provide economic value. Ho yeah, she left that out too.
If you've read The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand of God" can be taken as a harbinger of consequences. If the prescriptions that Adam Smith touted were followed, the markets are likely to self correct; and the invisible hand lifts the economy. If the prescriptions are ignored (as they usually are), the hand comes down hard and the economy collapses.
We have been through this before; and the economy collapsed. This is because of perfectly natural responses to environmental stimuli. Human behavior creates the collapse. Monetary economics is Coercion; plain and simple. It's advantageous to those with empathy issues. Monetary economics and by extension Coercion has overthrown every form of government that has ever existed. The political system has taken the blame for every economic collapse that has ever happened. We keep changing the political systems rather than the economic system. We're not dealing with the real root of the issue.
The Father of Capitalism, Adam Smith was a brilliant man; but he didn't have the benefit of a behavioral science to draw from. He died decades before Darwin was even born; so he didn't even have a concept of environmental pressures. He just understood how to get the desired outcome. What he didn't understand is that the human amygdala was responsible for those anti-competitive behaviors. He also didn't understand that natural distributions played a part in division of labor as did sociopathy. He didn't understand that perceptions of scarcity produce hoarding behaviors; and he certainly didn't understand that not everyone could understand what he had written.
Market dogma should be classified as an extinction risk.