4 ms·

In the United States, laws come from Congress.

astrange 3y ago
SCOTUS is unfortunately more powerful than Congress, at least because they're more capable of doing things. Luckily they're more aligned with consumer welfare, which is good, as opposed to Khan's hippie "everything big must be bad" standard. This only supports small business owners and VCs, who are probably the most evil people in the US.
- todd-davies 3y ago
  I don't think it's correct to paint Khan as following a "big is bad" standard. For instance, in [1] she explicitly says the opposite: > Antimonopoly does not mean ‘big is bad.' The New Brandeisians—like Justice Brandeis—recognise that certain industries tend naturally towards monopoly. This is especially true of networks. In such cases, the answer is not to break these firms up, but to design a system of public regulation that prevents the executives who manage this monopoly from exploiting their power. A second goal is to ensure that executives face the right incentives to provide the best service possible to everyone who relies on the monopoly to sell or to buy a particular product or service. In the past Americans have used both direct government regulation, and various forms of antimonopoly law and policy, to achieve these ends. [1] https://academic.oup.com/jeclap/article/9/3/131/4915966 https://academic.oup.com/jeclap/article/9/3/131/4915966
  - astrange 3y ago
    I would believe what she said if she was doing this, but instead she's suing tech companies and asking them to break up in silly ways which is… not that.
monero-xmr 3y ago
I’m praying that Chevron gets overturned. The amount of power that has been handed over to unfireable, unelected bureaucrats is beyond comprehension.
- hypersoar 3y ago
  Overturning Chevron will simply transfer that power to even more unfireable, unelected judges.
  - dantheman 3y ago
    I'd prefer judges to bureaucrats.
  - monero-xmr 3y ago
    It will require congress to pass laws. Right now they fob it off to bureaucrats as cover. No longer

SCOTUS is unfortunately more powerful than Congress, at least because they're more capable of doing things. Luckily they're more aligned with consumer welfare, which is good, as opposed to Khan's hippie "everything big must be bad" standard. This only supports small business owners and VCs, who are probably the most evil people in the US.

todd-davies 3y ago
I don't think it's correct to paint Khan as following a "big is bad" standard. For instance, in [1] she explicitly says the opposite: > Antimonopoly does not mean ‘big is bad.' The New Brandeisians—like Justice Brandeis—recognise that certain industries tend naturally towards monopoly. This is especially true of networks. In such cases, the answer is not to break these firms up, but to design a system of public regulation that prevents the executives who manage this monopoly from exploiting their power. A second goal is to ensure that executives face the right incentives to provide the best service possible to everyone who relies on the monopoly to sell or to buy a particular product or service. In the past Americans have used both direct government regulation, and various forms of antimonopoly law and policy, to achieve these ends. [1] https://academic.oup.com/jeclap/article/9/3/131/4915966 https://academic.oup.com/jeclap/article/9/3/131/4915966
- astrange 3y ago
  I would believe what she said if she was doing this, but instead she's suing tech companies and asking them to break up in silly ways which is… not that.

monero-xmr 3y ago

I’m praying that Chevron gets overturned. The amount of power that has been handed over to unfireable, unelected bureaucrats is beyond comprehension.

hypersoar 3y ago
Overturning Chevron will simply transfer that power to even more unfireable, unelected judges.
- dantheman 3y ago
  I'd prefer judges to bureaucrats.
- monero-xmr 3y ago
  It will require congress to pass laws. Right now they fob it off to bureaucrats as cover. No longer