| > closing off their escape route and de-facto enforcing the sell-off to the Chinese. There was only one escape route? And it happened to be the one they selected themselves? That seems dubious. > organizations that have expressly indicated that they want to break up the big companies We literally have laws which _require_ them to do this. This isn't ideological targeting it's the consequence of the "due care clause" of the constitution. You should ask why previous iterations of the FTC have ignored this responsibility not why the one in question actually tried to live up to it. > A simple "Request For Evidence". These are publicly traded corporations not hapless individuals. > I also suspect there is a partisan slant to this. You've tried to obscure yours but I suspect the same thing of you. > You operate in the fog of war. This is goalpost shifting to the level of propaganda. You operate in a market. If you fail your assets will be auctioned off. The death of a corporation is a natural consequence of the system we've developed. It's required. It caries none of the weight of the death of an individual or of war. > We could easily be telling a different tale if the bet paid off. > In 2022, one cannot go back to the 2010s and repair whatever bad business decisions have been made. This seems contradictory. We could easily be telling a different tale if the 2010s played out differently; however, as you say, one cannot go back. |
There are laws around breaking up monopolies, which is a completely different concept.