Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by wbsss4412 1378 days ago
Antitrust is government intervention into the market. Not enforcing antitrust is not granting a monopoly.

Don’t get me wrong, antitrust is good! Government intervention is necessary. But lasseiz-fares does not mean what you appear to think it means.
1 comments
asdff 1378 days ago
When a corporation has an obvious monopoly and the government does not intervene, they are signalling the status quo is allowed to continue
link
wbsss4412 1378 days ago
Yes, except that is not a market outcome, that is government intervention into the market.

That is substantively different from a government granted monopoly, wherein it is illegal to create a competing business.

The point is that monopolies are a natural market outcome, and are what created Google. Does Google continue to exist as it is because the government has chosen not to do anything? Yes. Welcome to the free market.

link
asdff 1376 days ago
Google was not really created by a natural market outcome when you consider what it takes to be a large multinational corporation operating out of the US. Any time a policy decision is made that can benefit either the larger or more politically connected stakeholder versus the smaller stakeholder, guess who gets the short end of the stick almost every time in practice. It's not the big guy. Google is open about this, they have a political action committee, they have a website page where they open with "At Google, we believe it is important to have a voice in the political process..." (1). To suggest that they don't use these mechanisms to better their own position in this market you allege to be free is naive.

https://www.google.com/publicpolicy/transparency/

link