3 ms·
The best way to handle this seems to be accountability. There needs to be a reasonable way to hold companies to what they say. Currently, a company says the eff
by denzil_correa 10y ago
The best way to handle this seems to be accountability. There needs to be a reasonable way to hold companies to what they say. Currently, a company says the effect would be X in 5 years. In 5 years, these effects should be studied and if the variance is more than a reasonable standard - the merger should be relooked at and appropriate recommendations should be taken.
The current system looks at merger decisions as a one time policy decision. It should take it up as an iterative exercise.
- oli5679 10y agoThis is really interesting. One solution would be social norms expressing scepticism towards pundits that made bold claims without publicly placing a large bet corresponding to the position.
- oli5679 10y agoThis is really interesting. One solution would be social norms expressing scepticism towards pundits that made bold claims without publicly placing a large bet corresponding to the position.