4 ms·

Unpopular opinion- I don't want 'the people' to be 'in control of tech', or really anyone else's private property. That's just populism, and populism is usually

Unpopular opinion- I don't want 'the people' to be 'in control of tech', or really anyone else's private property. That's just populism, and populism is usually bad. I would like to see more antitrust enforcement (actually I think some of the examples outside of tech are more egregious), and I would like to see dispassionate, highly educated professional civil servants & judges make calls around excessive market concentration based on objective, transparent criteria. This is kind of the key concept that separates a developing country from a 1st world one- do you have a highly professionalized bureaucracy & judiciary working off of technocratic criteria, or are 'the people' (aka local demagogue) just deciding which companies are in favor this month? Like, the arrangement we have now with the Federal Reserve & interest rates is good. Highly educated, objective technocrats who are deliberately insulated from voters make good-faith calls. Meanwhile in every developing country, 'the people' (aka the local strongman) decides what he wants the interest rates to be based on whim. TLDR- antitrust based on objective rule by experts good, antitrust based on populism/demagoguery/'the people' (whatever that means), probably bad. I hate this leftist framing that just adds 'the people' to every decision in society

andjd 5y ago
I don't disagree with you that antitrust is nuanced and complicated and we should have smart, dedicated professionals handling the day-to-day enforcement. But the dominant position for decades on antitrust, from academics, judges, and bureaucrats -- regardless of party -- has been that antitrust is not a big deal, and they've rubber-stamped a massive consolidation of American enterprise across vast swaths of the economy. It's not out-of-place for 'we the people' to express that something's wrong here. Farmers can feel it when John Deere prohibits them from repairing their own tractors, and there's not a good alternative they can buy. Homeowners can feel it when the price of 2 by 4s spikes because a few companies run all the sawmills and would rather charge higher prices than increase capacity to meet demand. Flyers feel it when all the major airlines decide to charge extra for checked bags within a few months of each other. Everyone feels it when they see how wealth is more concentrated at the top and how it feels harder for the average young person to have the same standard of living as their parents and grandparents. It's also not complicated to understand the root of the issue. That companies with monopoly power will charge more and produce less is a bedrock of economics taught in high school. It's also well understood that an industry dominated by a small number of firms will act somewhat like a monopoly because there's less competitive pressure. So yes, it's better to have experts enforce antitrust. But it's also incumbent upon "the people" to demand accountability and reform when the status quo is failing them.
- hash872 5y ago
  You're conflating a bunch of different phenomena together there (right to repair has no particular connection to monopoly, that's a non-sequitur). You're calling everything you don't like 'monopoly'. Also, if we want cheaper 2x4s, I think lowering our tariffs on foreign and in particular Canadian lumber might be a better start. US timber is a highly protected industry! I don't see that 'the people' are demanding the things that you're rhetorically arguing against, based on the evidence of actual US elections. Worth noting that all of the alleged tech 'monopolies' have very high public approval in most surveys- Amazon is consistently the highest rated! This is a big chunk of the problem with basing everything off 'the people'- they are fickle, with a shallow understanding of policy and a very short attention span. If 'the people' really want more antitrust, they should consistently vote for politicians who run on a platform advocating that. A quick look at US electoral history suggests their alleged antitrust desires are not very strong?

andjd 5y ago

I don't disagree with you that antitrust is nuanced and complicated and we should have smart, dedicated professionals handling the day-to-day enforcement. But the dominant position for decades on antitrust, from academics, judges, and bureaucrats -- regardless of party -- has been that antitrust is not a big deal, and they've rubber-stamped a massive consolidation of American enterprise across vast swaths of the economy. It's not out-of-place for 'we the people' to express that something's wrong here. Farmers can feel it when John Deere prohibits them from repairing their own tractors, and there's not a good alternative they can buy. Homeowners can feel it when the price of 2 by 4s spikes because a few companies run all the sawmills and would rather charge higher prices than increase capacity to meet demand. Flyers feel it when all the major airlines decide to charge extra for checked bags within a few months of each other. Everyone feels it when they see how wealth is more concentrated at the top and how it feels harder for the average young person to have the same standard of living as their parents and grandparents. It's also not complicated to understand the root of the issue. That companies with monopoly power will charge more and produce less is a bedrock of economics taught in high school. It's also well understood that an industry dominated by a small number of firms will act somewhat like a monopoly because there's less competitive pressure. So yes, it's better to have experts enforce antitrust. But it's also incumbent upon "the people" to demand accountability and reform when the status quo is failing them.

hash872 5y ago
You're conflating a bunch of different phenomena together there (right to repair has no particular connection to monopoly, that's a non-sequitur). You're calling everything you don't like 'monopoly'. Also, if we want cheaper 2x4s, I think lowering our tariffs on foreign and in particular Canadian lumber might be a better start. US timber is a highly protected industry! I don't see that 'the people' are demanding the things that you're rhetorically arguing against, based on the evidence of actual US elections. Worth noting that all of the alleged tech 'monopolies' have very high public approval in most surveys- Amazon is consistently the highest rated! This is a big chunk of the problem with basing everything off 'the people'- they are fickle, with a shallow understanding of policy and a very short attention span. If 'the people' really want more antitrust, they should consistently vote for politicians who run on a platform advocating that. A quick look at US electoral history suggests their alleged antitrust desires are not very strong?