4 ms·

The headline here is deceptive. Nothing in the article mentions any plans by "America's trustbusters to curtail the use of non-compete clauses". Rather, this is

The headline here is deceptive. Nothing in the article mentions any plans by "America's trustbusters to curtail the use of non-compete clauses". Rather, this is a short essay about non-competes, explaining why they are a bad idea. The article ends with a call-to-action: > California, the global hq of disruptive innovation, goes a step further and bans non-competes altogether. The FTC should do the same, on the grounds that they are anticompetitive.

toomuchtodo 4y ago
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/ftc-proposes-rule-ban-noncompete-clauses-which-hurt-workers-harm-competition https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/... https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/07/09/executive-order-on-promoting-competition-in-the-american-economy/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-action... https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/antitrust-enforcers-to-ban-indentured https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/antitrust-enforcers-to-ba... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/09/opinion/linakhan-ftc-noncompete.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/09/opinion/linakhan-ftc-nonc... https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1611025895388577792.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1611025895388577792.html
- blendergeek 4y ago
  I would prefer that those things would be mentioned _in the article_. As it stands, I came away from the article not having been enlightened on any of the topics you just linked.
  - toomuchtodo 4y ago
    Did the links I provide help with context? I am attempting to be helpful.
    - blendergeek 4y ago
      Absolutely. Thank you.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> The headline here is deceptive. Nothing in the article mentions any plans by "America's trustbusters to curtail the use of non-compete clauses". Can't even read the whole article because of the paywall, but the part before the “pay for the full article” does mention the FTC has them in their sights. This is an opinion article about the news, not a news article, though, so it focuses on the why its good, not the details of the FTC action. See, for the latter, from the source: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/ftc-proposes-rule-ban-noncompete-clauses-which-hurt-workers-harm-competition https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/...
- _zzaw 4y ago
  here ya go https://archive.ph/oOJeb https://archive.ph/oOJeb
wpietri 4y ago
This is a "leader", which is the British name for an opinion piece. Its job is not to explain the news to you. As with most newspaper opinion pieces, it's a reaction to something in the news that you are expected to know about, or at least be able to look up. As a subscriber, I think this is how it should be. There have been a zillion articles about this FTC action going back at least to June. Part of what I value about The Economist is its pithy, punchy writing and its assumption of a competent, numerically literate audience. Having to spoon-feed the basics in every leader would be tedious both for them and for its subscribers.

toomuchtodo 4y ago

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/ftc-proposes-rule-ban-noncompete-clauses-which-hurt-workers-harm-competition https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/... https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/07/09/executive-order-on-promoting-competition-in-the-american-economy/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-action... https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/antitrust-enforcers-to-ban-indentured https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/antitrust-enforcers-to-ba... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/09/opinion/linakhan-ftc-noncompete.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/09/opinion/linakhan-ftc-nonc... https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1611025895388577792.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1611025895388577792.html

blendergeek 4y ago
I would prefer that those things would be mentioned _in the article_. As it stands, I came away from the article not having been enlightened on any of the topics you just linked.
- toomuchtodo 4y ago
  Did the links I provide help with context? I am attempting to be helpful.
  - blendergeek 4y ago
    Absolutely. Thank you.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> The headline here is deceptive. Nothing in the article mentions any plans by "America's trustbusters to curtail the use of non-compete clauses". Can't even read the whole article because of the paywall, but the part before the “pay for the full article” does mention the FTC has them in their sights. This is an opinion article about the news, not a news article, though, so it focuses on the why its good, not the details of the FTC action. See, for the latter, from the source: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/ftc-proposes-rule-ban-noncompete-clauses-which-hurt-workers-harm-competition https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/...

_zzaw 4y ago
here ya go https://archive.ph/oOJeb https://archive.ph/oOJeb

wpietri 4y ago

This is a "leader", which is the British name for an opinion piece. Its job is not to explain the news to you. As with most newspaper opinion pieces, it's a reaction to something in the news that you are expected to know about, or at least be able to look up. As a subscriber, I think this is how it should be. There have been a zillion articles about this FTC action going back at least to June. Part of what I value about The Economist is its pithy, punchy writing and its assumption of a competent, numerically literate audience. Having to spoon-feed the basics in every leader would be tedious both for them and for its subscribers.