It’s only a threat of violence if it’s from the right. Otherwise, we know this is a metaphor. 🤣

It’s only a threat of violence if it’s from the right. Otherwise, we know this is a metaphor. 🤣 https://x.com/aoc/status/1844034727935988155?s=46

Political activist. Founder of mydemocracy.app and /advocacy. Host of the /politics channel. RCs may or may not = endorsements.

All her big tech policies have been terrible

Can you elaborate? From the outside perspective, I'm generally supportive of breaking up monopolies and other anticompetitive practices. It seems like she's been one of the most active FTC chairs. 

Although I generally agree with many of Marc Cuban's takes, I saw this from him. 

“If it were me, I wouldn’t” keep her on as a commissioner next year. Cuban, who founded CostPlusDrugs in 2022, said he supported Khan’s efforts to regulate the pharmaceutical industry but thinks “she’s hurting more than she’s helping” by going after artificial intelligence firms.

“This is about AI. It’s a zero sum race for global dominance,” Cuban added later on Tuesday on social media. “If we lose, the consequences are far more than economic.”

Can you elaborate? From the outside perspective, I'm generally supportive of breaking up monopolies and other anticompetitive practices. It seems like she's been one of the most active FTC chairs. 

Although I generally agree with many of Marc Cuban's takes, I saw this from him. 

“If it were me, I wouldn’t” keep her on as a commissioner next year. Cuban, who founded CostPlusDrugs in 2022, said he supported Khan’s efforts to regulate the pharmaceutical industry but thinks “she’s hurting more than she’s helping” by going after artificial intelligence firms.

“This is about AI. It’s a zero sum race for global dominance,” Cuban added later on Tuesday on social media. “If we lose, the consequences are far more than economic.” 

https://qz.com/aoc-mark-cuban-kamala-harris-ftc-lina-khan-billionaire-1851669012

> From the outside perspective, I'm generally supportive of breaking up monopolies and other anticompetitive practices. It seems like she's been one of the most active FTC chairs. 

What does this mean practically, though?

1. How do you define monopoly?
2. Who is being harmed?
3. What is remedy?

Separately, she's killed the M&A market, which has a lagging effect on overall company creation, which is good for the economy and consumers.

1. I would define a monopoly as a corporation or corporations, if we extend to oligopolies, that can determine market outcomes through limiting competition or price fixing. 
2. In the end, consumers are harmed in the end through either having to pay more for goods and services than they otherwise would in a perfect market, or through the limitation of innovation by limiting competition. 
3. I guess that's the question. How do you remedy these bad actors without doing more harm than good? Is it through antitrust lawsuits, breaking up companies, or limiting mergers?

So you see M&A as a net positive on the economy and consumers?

Also, not asking to be combative. My undergrad was in economics but I have never worked at a for-profit company so my blinders are high.

I don't think any big tech company has a perfect monopoly but companies like Amazon have a significant market share that allows them to limit competition. This lawsuit is an example of how they harm consumers. 
*Biasing Amazon’s search results to preference Amazon’s own products over ones that Amazon knows are of better quality.
*Charging costly fees on the hundreds of thousands of sellers that currently have no choice but to rely on Amazon to stay in business. These fees harm not only sellers but also shoppers, who pay increased prices for thousands of products sold on or off Amazon.  

I won't say that Amazon has complete control of the e-commerce market but they have enough power to hurt competitors. Amazon is larger than the next 15 largest US ecommerce retailers combined accounting for 40.4% of total US ecommerce retail sales in 2024.

I don't think any big tech company has a perfect monopoly but companies like Amazon have a significant market share that allows them to limit competition. This lawsuit is an example of how they harm consumers. 
*Biasing Amazon’s search results to preference Amazon’s own products over ones that Amazon knows are of better quality.
*Charging costly fees on the hundreds of thousands of sellers that currently have no choice but to rely on Amazon to stay in business. These fees harm not only sellers but also shoppers, who pay increased prices for thousands of products sold on or off Amazon.  

I won't say that Amazon has complete control of the e-commerce market but they have enough power to hurt competitors. Amazon is larger than the next 15 largest US ecommerce retailers combined accounting for 40.4% of total US ecommerce retail sales in 2024.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/ftc-sues-amazon-illegally-maintaining-monopoly-power

https://www.emarketer.com/insights/amazon-revenue/

Can you give a concrete example of a big tech company that you believe to be a monopoly and then define 1) the consumer harm and/or 2) market power (by defining the market, which is important part of legal definition)