Every time I read one of these articles on modern antitrust, I get frustrated by the laws themselves. Win or lose on the case, I don't think they do much. Ever

Every time I read one of these articles on modern antitrust, I get frustrated by the laws themselves. Win or lose on the case, I don't think they do much. Everything seems to be based on a marginalist theory/formalisation of what monopolies are and how they affect economies. The theory/law seems to target very specific sets of economic dynamics. IRL, monopoly is a more nebulous concept. Size, power, ability to structure the market are often its primary characteristics, not a simple more-profit-less-utility outcome that can be charted with a simple model. Actual antitrust, I think, needs to be more like an industrial policy set than what exists currently. Whatever the outcome of current antitrust actions, the monopolies stay mostly intact and unharmed. What's the point?