Mergers should be illegal.

That’s not mutually exclusive with my point. So what?

The difference is self defense. As stated elsewhere in this thread, we should all agree its morally acceptable to kill nazis. With them, it’s either kill or be killed. If we didn’t step up against them in WW2 it would have been disastrous. And with CEOs, billionaires, and other business execs it’s no different. They’re actively killing everyone they can as quickly as they can because it makes them a quick buck.

So ultimately it boils down to self defense.

A state however gets no self defense out of capital punishment. It instead becomes a way to silence political opponents, innocents routinely are executed, and so on. The state cannot be granted the power to kill because it will abuse it. The people eventually need to defend themselves from the state when it is granted this power.

The violence of the oppressed is not the same as the violence of the oppressor.

Sure there is. History is littered with examples. Though a more full explanation of the solution is probably a violation of the TOS.

Geneally, you don’t become a CEO without being a shitty person, and therefore a shitty parent.

The mechanism is irrelevant. Murder is still murder even if through insurance denials, pollution, or any other bullshit legal ways of killing people.

Higher effort, higher reward