3 ms·

> I don't understand how market regulators allow this. The US government is literally for sale. Businesses know that this window is limited and are executing

by wyldfire 10mo ago

> I don't understand how market regulators allow this. The US government is literally for sale. Businesses know that this window is limited and are executing antitrust manuvers left and right while they can.

DicIfTEx 10mo ago
Under current DoJ antitrust guidelines, there's nothing to stop a future administration from reviewing any anti-competitive actions ignored by the current one as part of an anti-competitive series of actions: https://www.justice.gov/atr/merger-guidelines/applying-merger-guidelines/guideline-8 https://www.justice.gov/atr/merger-guidelines/applying-merge... So those businesses either know, or expect, that either: a) these guidelines will be changed in a way that makes them hard or impossible to revert (i.e. through legislation or a Supreme Court judgement); or b) there is little risk of a future change of administration.
- dragonwriter 10mo ago
  Or (c) that any future administration is going to have a lot of more pressing concerns that will drown out seriously relitigating past mergers and acquisitions, and any concerns they do have will most likely be mollified with agreed remedies that sacrifice far less than the value of doing the merger. Very few administrations do everything they theoretically could under the law and their own guidelines (even the ones that also do lots that violates both.)
  - navigate8310 10mo ago
    I don't think future administrators would enforce laws retrospectively and thereby dent their business friendly image in the process.
- beart 10mo ago
  A quick google search indicates the average tenure of a CEO is ~7 years. I wonder if there should be a c) There is a lack of meaningful planning beyond the current status quo.
- wkat4242 10mo ago
  Well there's also a c) - Whatever they get away with now they will have in pocket, and whatever penance they will have to do with a future administration will take years and years of legal back and forth to actually pan out, by which time it will be watered down so any fine will dwarf the profits made during this period. Also, if they manage to reach "too big to fail" status by that point, whatever punishment will be nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
bdangubic 10mo ago
the window is un-limited so there is not rush. the government has been for sale for a long time and will continue to be so regardless of who is “running the country”
- solumunus 10mo ago
  [flagged]
  - bdangubic 10mo ago
    yes
- wyldfire 10mo ago
  > the government has been for sale for a long time The government has been under significant influence of corporations for a long time: this is true. But now bribes are being accepted unabashedly. Presumably, hopefully, this won't last beyond the current administration. To equate the two is dishonest.
  - bdangubic 10mo ago
    [flagged]
    - Tadpole9181 10mo ago
      [flagged]
      - bdangubic 10mo ago
        nope, I just don’t fall for the sensantionalism and clickbait shit like “oh oh shit is really bad now, OMG we were such a sancuary before but look at us now…”
        arcatech 10mo ago

DicIfTEx 10mo ago

Under current DoJ antitrust guidelines, there's nothing to stop a future administration from reviewing any anti-competitive actions ignored by the current one as part of an anti-competitive series of actions: https://www.justice.gov/atr/merger-guidelines/applying-merger-guidelines/guideline-8 https://www.justice.gov/atr/merger-guidelines/applying-merge... So those businesses either know, or expect, that either: a) these guidelines will be changed in a way that makes them hard or impossible to revert (i.e. through legislation or a Supreme Court judgement); or b) there is little risk of a future change of administration.

dragonwriter 10mo ago
Or (c) that any future administration is going to have a lot of more pressing concerns that will drown out seriously relitigating past mergers and acquisitions, and any concerns they do have will most likely be mollified with agreed remedies that sacrifice far less than the value of doing the merger. Very few administrations do everything they theoretically could under the law and their own guidelines (even the ones that also do lots that violates both.)
- navigate8310 10mo ago
  I don't think future administrators would enforce laws retrospectively and thereby dent their business friendly image in the process.
beart 10mo ago
A quick google search indicates the average tenure of a CEO is ~7 years. I wonder if there should be a c) There is a lack of meaningful planning beyond the current status quo.
wkat4242 10mo ago
Well there's also a c) - Whatever they get away with now they will have in pocket, and whatever penance they will have to do with a future administration will take years and years of legal back and forth to actually pan out, by which time it will be watered down so any fine will dwarf the profits made during this period. Also, if they manage to reach "too big to fail" status by that point, whatever punishment will be nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

bdangubic 10mo ago

the window is un-limited so there is not rush. the government has been for sale for a long time and will continue to be so regardless of who is “running the country”

solumunus 10mo ago
[flagged]
- bdangubic 10mo ago
  yes
wyldfire 10mo ago
> the government has been for sale for a long time The government has been under significant influence of corporations for a long time: this is true. But now bribes are being accepted unabashedly. Presumably, hopefully, this won't last beyond the current administration. To equate the two is dishonest.
- bdangubic 10mo ago
  [flagged]
  - Tadpole9181 10mo ago
    [flagged]
    - bdangubic 10mo ago
      nope, I just don’t fall for the sensantionalism and clickbait shit like “oh oh shit is really bad now, OMG we were such a sancuary before but look at us now…”
      - arcatech 10mo ago