Also, the mechanism is explicitly outlined (of cause very briefly) in the comment, so no need to resolve to premises. If you do have something concrete to counteract and add for the discussion, that would be awesome!
The premise basically states that those who add value cannot be exploited, marginalized, or excluded from the system.
In real life of course they can, via market power, political power, violence, deception, or many other forces.
It happens daily, probably to you or your family.
> those who add value
There's a concept of "value-add" intermediary, and it pretty much universally means reducing value for the customer. Car dealerships are a typical example.
I'm torn on this. On the one hand, it makes sense in theory that excessive vertical integration is bad for society, and local businesses are good for society. On the other hand, I observe that in practice, competitive markets are subject to Gresham's law[0] - the shitty ones win over the good ones. So it follows, and something I also observed to be good as a heuristic, that the more layers of competing intermediaries you add, the shittier it gets for the customer.
--
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law - "Bad money drives out good".
That nonsensical. Dealerships of course add value, they allow you to actually see and test drive the car, they physically deliver the car, and they fix the car.
You could argue that the value is not worth the cost. Maybe so. But middlemen almost always add some value. And that’s independent of the more meta-value, which is providing a check against the market power of manufacturers.