3 ms·
The whole point of breaking up large companies is because their size renders them unaccountable quazi-governments. Unaccountable to who? I can think of plenty
by refurb 2y ago
The whole point of breaking up large companies is because their size renders them unaccountable quazi-governments.
Unaccountable to who? I can think of plenty “almost monopolies” that no longer exist or are former shells which would infer they were accountable - at least to the customer.
But the more important question is - how big is too big? Is it the same for every company? If not, who decides? How do you measure it?
If it’s not objective criteria, it becomes a “I know it when I see it” where subjective variables result in a company in the crosshairs. So in the end, the government picking winners and losers.
- n4r9 2y ago> So in the end, the government picking winners and losers. I'm not a US citizen but I understand that it comes down to the FTC and the courts rather than the government.
- immibis 2y agoThat's how a lot of laws work. There's always an element of subjectivity. Is that guy a murderer? Well, did he intend to kill the victim or was it an accident? The court is supposed to decide whether he intended to, using the available facts, but nobody involved can read minds so it's really a guess. If you didn't want to be convicted of murder, you wouldn't walk right up to the line of what constitutes murder. You'd stay far away from that line on the legal side. Same for companies, if the system is doing its job.