I've quit my job before when my boss(es) completely blocked me from doing my job and did whatever they wanted against all logic and reason. But then again, my job wasn't to hold bad actors accountable and seek justice for the people.
"The deal was negotiated without the input of the trial team, catching even the lead counsel by surprise." Is trial team a technical term? How would you negotiate without the people people most familiar with the case.
So, here's the reality of American admnistration: It's all mostly delegation. In my state, we have house rules that all say "blah blah blah or as provided by the comissioner". But we never talk to the commissioner. They never deal with our rules directly. They delgate their reponsibility to about 4 layers of supervisors down to the technical manager. We deal with the technical manager. Whenever we read a rule that references the commissioner, that's just the technical manager.
Now, this essentially means if a delusional actor was ever put into the seat of commissioner, they could fire everyone and do whatever, because theres no delegation requirement.
I'd hazard, thats all that matters: remove the delegation and they're still following laws because the system fundamentally works by delegation for a large swath of the functioning. Remove the delegation and it looks like fiefdoms, lords and ladies.
Insert the astronaut with a gun meme (always has been). Lords and ladies also delegated to administrative functionaries, with similar results and dynamics. The difference here is that the commissioners are, hopefully, democratically elected, under the dictates and regulation of the U.S. and state constitutions. Which is a key difference.
FTA: No merger challenged since January 2025. This means that dozens of mergers that would typically be anticompetitive bleed consumers for money (think vet and dentist rollups) will happen unchallenged.
Next time someone says both sides are the same, remind them about this.
Democrats brought suit against an obvious monopoly over the most unifying and joyful aspect of human existence (Music), and Republicans scuttled it so brazenly, you have to assume that Trump was bribed.
The current administration is squishy-soft on white collar crime.
(The United States Department of Justice is mostly to handle white-collar crime.
Most DOJ authority comes from the Federal power to regulate interstate commerce.
Violent crime is primarily a state matter. Then came the ICE overexpansion.)
Trump who? All discourse on YC now pretends he doesn't exist, all the tech bros didn't so loudly campaign for him, nor does he make any statements. Bad news? Click flag and don't confront your actions!
> If Biden had bragged about what Khan, Kanter, etc. were doing, instead of hiding it in embarrassment (and letting other parts of his admin sabotage it), he would have been popular.
lol
that is a remarkable take
you think far too highly of the American public to think they have anything close to this sophisticated (or aware) of a view of antitrust!
This argument seems asinine. We've had 12 of the last 24 years with democrat presidents or majority..and how many monopolies have been broken up in that time span? zero. Democrats do push more anti merger antics than Republicans... but come on.
there aren't even two sides. its money vs not money and anyone still buying into the reality show of our political system is deluded.
These cases take upwards of 10 years to resolve. Modern large corporations generate tons and tons of paper documentation which must be ingested and indexed and analyzed to produce the legal case. This takes a lot of resources and time to get right. And meanwhile the corporate legal team is making motions and arguments in court as you're doing discovery. What's asinine is expecting these cases to get resolved within a year. Whether the anticipated ruling is in favor of the DOJ or not, the case needs to be properly adjudicated before the court and I don't see that taking less than a few years to be fair. The flip side of monopoly prosecution is that a lot of people lose their livelihoods and we unfortunately do need to take this into account in our justice system, regardless of how much we want to stick it to Ticketmaster.
I've quit my job before when my boss(es) completely blocked me from doing my job and did whatever they wanted against all logic and reason. But then again, my job wasn't to hold bad actors accountable and seek justice for the people.
Yeah, just imagine how frustrating it'd be if that was your job, and you were prevented from doing it by the bad actors! Could drive a person insane.
Antitrust division at DOJ has been subjective since the beginning. The Sherman Act is very broad and requires a certain discretion to enforce
"The deal was negotiated without the input of the trial team, catching even the lead counsel by surprise." Is trial team a technical term? How would you negotiate without the people people most familiar with the case.
It's pretty easy to negotiate donations to any of Trump's many businesses or PACs.
So, here's the reality of American admnistration: It's all mostly delegation. In my state, we have house rules that all say "blah blah blah or as provided by the comissioner". But we never talk to the commissioner. They never deal with our rules directly. They delgate their reponsibility to about 4 layers of supervisors down to the technical manager. We deal with the technical manager. Whenever we read a rule that references the commissioner, that's just the technical manager.
Now, this essentially means if a delusional actor was ever put into the seat of commissioner, they could fire everyone and do whatever, because theres no delegation requirement.
I'd hazard, thats all that matters: remove the delegation and they're still following laws because the system fundamentally works by delegation for a large swath of the functioning. Remove the delegation and it looks like fiefdoms, lords and ladies.
Insert the astronaut with a gun meme (always has been). Lords and ladies also delegated to administrative functionaries, with similar results and dynamics. The difference here is that the commissioners are, hopefully, democratically elected, under the dictates and regulation of the U.S. and state constitutions. Which is a key difference.
FTA: No merger challenged since January 2025. This means that dozens of mergers that would typically be anticompetitive bleed consumers for money (think vet and dentist rollups) will happen unchallenged.
https://archive.is/AaKR7
Next time someone says both sides are the same, remind them about this.
Democrats brought suit against an obvious monopoly over the most unifying and joyful aspect of human existence (Music), and Republicans scuttled it so brazenly, you have to assume that Trump was bribed.
The current administration is squishy-soft on white collar crime.
(The United States Department of Justice is mostly to handle white-collar crime. Most DOJ authority comes from the Federal power to regulate interstate commerce. Violent crime is primarily a state matter. Then came the ICE overexpansion.)
> squishy-soft on white collar crime.
I disagree. They actively support it in a hard core way. Squishy soft imply not wanting it but being weak. They are not weak, they love it.
It sounds to me like you and parent poster are in agreement in all but wording.
But okay. Let's rephrase: "The current administration is hard for white collar crime."
Republicans will be happy about this because owning the libs is all they care about, and only whiny liberals listen to concerts in their worldview.
Trump who? All discourse on YC now pretends he doesn't exist, all the tech bros didn't so loudly campaign for him, nor does he make any statements. Bad news? Click flag and don't confront your actions!
[flagged]
You're right. 0 is innumerable.
> If Biden had bragged about what Khan, Kanter, etc. were doing, instead of hiding it in embarrassment (and letting other parts of his admin sabotage it), he would have been popular.
lol
that is a remarkable take
you think far too highly of the American public to think they have anything close to this sophisticated (or aware) of a view of antitrust!
You clearly have a deluded magasphere view of reality. I recommend changing the channel.
This argument seems asinine. We've had 12 of the last 24 years with democrat presidents or majority..and how many monopolies have been broken up in that time span? zero. Democrats do push more anti merger antics than Republicans... but come on. there aren't even two sides. its money vs not money and anyone still buying into the reality show of our political system is deluded.
These cases take upwards of 10 years to resolve. Modern large corporations generate tons and tons of paper documentation which must be ingested and indexed and analyzed to produce the legal case. This takes a lot of resources and time to get right. And meanwhile the corporate legal team is making motions and arguments in court as you're doing discovery. What's asinine is expecting these cases to get resolved within a year. Whether the anticipated ruling is in favor of the DOJ or not, the case needs to be properly adjudicated before the court and I don't see that taking less than a few years to be fair. The flip side of monopoly prosecution is that a lot of people lose their livelihoods and we unfortunately do need to take this into account in our justice system, regardless of how much we want to stick it to Ticketmaster.
Ya true i agree with that