3 ms·

I can promise you that the major tech companies have no shortage of people in Washington preaching the benefits their companies provide. I wouldn’t say they hav

I can promise you that the major tech companies have no shortage of people in Washington preaching the benefits their companies provide. I wouldn’t say they have less allies than I would say that people don’t use the same rose-tinted glasses when it comes to these companies and their effects on the markets they participate in. It’d be perverse to have a congress that allows what it sees as monopolistic behavior just because their friends are the ones profiting from it.

stale2002 6y ago
> I would say that people don’t use the same rose-tinted glasses You can use different words to describe having less allies, or allies that are less likely to support them, if you want. But my point still stands. They either have less allies, or those allies are less likely to look at these tech companies through "rose-tinted glasses" Glad you agree that their former "allies" are no longer looking at these companies so favorable, using " rose-tinted glasses".
- travmatt 6y ago
  The only people who expected democrats to defend monopolies because they were ‘friends’ has either a very cynical or naive view of the influence of business on the Democratic Party, and very little historical perspective. Arguments that would essentially allow monopolistic behavior has pretty much always been firmly inside republican laissez-faire circles, and those allies are still very much there. Railing against tech elites may play great for tv, but let’s be honest - Peter Thiel, strong advocate of monopoly, still spoke at the Republican national convention. There’s a good reason they overruled fact-checkers when conservatives violated their prescribed rules, they know where their bread is buttered. https://www.engadget.com/facebook-overruled-fact-checkers-to-protect-conservatives-220229959.html https://www.engadget.com/facebook-overruled-fact-checkers-to...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

stale2002 6y ago

> I would say that people don’t use the same rose-tinted glasses You can use different words to describe having less allies, or allies that are less likely to support them, if you want. But my point still stands. They either have less allies, or those allies are less likely to look at these tech companies through "rose-tinted glasses" Glad you agree that their former "allies" are no longer looking at these companies so favorable, using " rose-tinted glasses".

travmatt 6y ago
The only people who expected democrats to defend monopolies because they were ‘friends’ has either a very cynical or naive view of the influence of business on the Democratic Party, and very little historical perspective. Arguments that would essentially allow monopolistic behavior has pretty much always been firmly inside republican laissez-faire circles, and those allies are still very much there. Railing against tech elites may play great for tv, but let’s be honest - Peter Thiel, strong advocate of monopoly, still spoke at the Republican national convention. There’s a good reason they overruled fact-checkers when conservatives violated their prescribed rules, they know where their bread is buttered. https://www.engadget.com/facebook-overruled-fact-checkers-to-protect-conservatives-220229959.html https://www.engadget.com/facebook-overruled-fact-checkers-to...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]