Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/07/24/odd-bedfellows.html
…
2 Likes
TFW the state finally gets around to taking the anti-trust action against monopolies that you’ve always wanted them to, but only for the most corrupt possible motivations. sigh. Is this going to be the best we get for “good news?”
8 Likes
I have a feeling that all the R’s are going to start getting upset about executive overreach and spending increases once there is a D as POTUS declaring global warming a national emergency. Oil and gas subsidies need to be diverted to clean-energy tech and education, and if Senate R’s don’t want to go along? Fine. Executive order, which we now have precedent for. Want to block judge nominees for 4 years if D’s have the senate? Fine. We have precedent for that. Most R’s are so short-sighted that they don’t realize they won’t be in charge forever.
5 Likes
Didn’t we mathematically show that price competition, when done well enough, is identical to price fixing (given sufficient computing power)?
The simplified-to-the-point-of-stupidity game-theory idea that defection is always better relies on a non-iterative system with no feedback or interaction. The cat’s out of the bag on monopolies. Pretty sure if you broken Google up into 20 different cells that weren’t allowed to communicate except in public they’d be able to find a way to function as a monopoly anyway. (Our only hope would be that egos of idiot managers would prevent them from doing so)
5 Likes
The “optimistic” side of me actually thinks they do know that they either don’t have much longer in power, or are on the verge of an extended dictatorship, and that’s why they are just going balls-to-the-wall with lawbreaking and corporate bootlicking.
1 Like
I just think the whole thing about “precedent” is nonsense. Suppose Obama had come after Trump. Do we honestly think that Obama would have a complete personality-ectomy and rule in a lawless, autocratic way because Trump did? No, Obama would still be Obama - a rule follower. Precedent in a real thing in courts, but the thing about precedent is it only sets the rules until it doesn’t. Outside of court it’s kind of a meaningless idea.
If the Republicans want to do something they’ll say the Democrats did it first even if the Democrats didn’t do it first. When they are in power they’ll ignore ever complaint they ever made about executive overreach. It was all a lie anyway. They just didn’t like the black guy.
7 Likes
It will probably turn into just a dog and pony show, like the antitrust “investigation” into Microsoft. Total waste of time. Grandstanding by some senators, Gates spread a little money around, and that was it. I always figured the real reason behind it was the government was concerned Gates was amassing blackmail material by reading their private emails and they were trying to strongarm him into backing off. And of course he won because he had more dirt on them then they had on him.
1 Like
A related thought is, this is standard thunder stealing. The Republinazis see that the Dumbocraps are getting some momentum with their user-friendly stuff, like right to repair laws and drug prices. They’re hoping that doing something which gullible people will think means they give a rat’s rear about consumers will take some of the wind out of the Demos’ sails on economic issues. Congresswhores know too many voters can be distracted by bread and circuses. This “investigation” will probably vanish like the morning dew the minute the RNazia’ poll numbers show some improvement.
Break up social media, stock prices plummet, the rubble is purchased at fire-sale prices by shadowy hedge-fund fronts for dark capital which is definitely not connected in any way to the Russian government / mafia or the presidential administration.
2 Likes
The idea that the Republicans and Democrats are going to impose antitrust sanctions on their biggest donors is laughable. It doesn’t even rise to the level of needing to be reported, Cory, unless you have suddenly awakened from a coma.
1 Like
There’s also the issue of: How far down does the partisan rot from Attorney General Barr go down?
The DOJ was arguing very recently (hypocritically using the Voter Rights Act, no less) for the Citizenship Question to be on the 2020 Census (which was so terribly argued, even the SCOTUS, partisan as it is, struck it down).
When the DOJ investigates Silicon Valley, how do we know it wont be selectively targeting companies that might tend to favor D’s and leave those that favor R’s alone? (The Trump Tax cut was laden with D-harming, R-affirming sections; eg, limiting the SALT deduction)
Absolutely. Nixon was unaccountably able to recover his reputation subsequently and live in denial to his death. And most people STILL dont know that “Watergate” is much, much more than the Watergate break-in. A full allocution by Nixon would have made this perfectly clear, as Nixon would say. (But at least Ford destroyed his reelection attempt because of it.)
Also, dont forget: Bush should never have pardoned the Iran-Contra felons (with whom he should have been found culpable).
2 Likes
SCOTUS broke up the Standard Oil monopoly in 1912. The CEO ruefully old his disbanding board, “Well boys, it’s just one damn thing after another.” One year later, the broke-up pieces’ stock prices had doubled. The Ma Bell breakup was similar, with most of the broke-up bits re-amalgamating later.
My conclusion: MAGAF (Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook) may be somewhat disassembled temporarily, but they won’t lose much money in the process.
That pretty much sums it up.
Pretty friggin’ far. Hopefully the next AG will have the willpower to go after all of these crooks. Holder should never have let Bush and company off the hook. Ford should never have pardoned Nixon. Don’t forget that they should all be in prison, too. If Trump and company walk away from this administration after dismantling American democracy, we’ll be seeing it again in a decade or so.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
