I don’t like his response at all. First of all, anti-trust laws, foisted upon us in the early days of the Progressive era by the likes of Teddy Roosevelt, are a bad idea that ought to be eliminated because they are inconsistent with free-market economies and can be abused for political reasons.
Is there anybody who really thinks that Office Depot and Staples ought not to be permitted to merge?
Second of all, it sounds like Trump is threatening to use government power to attack his political enemies — a la Bill Clinton and even Barack Obama.
Your comment is dumb. Trump is saying Bezos is attacking him because he doesn’t like Trump’s position, not the other way around. That’s clear.
Don't blame Teddy Roosevelt. The first anti-trust law was passed in 1890, three presidents before Teddy Roosevelt and for very good reason. John D. Rockefeller, among others, were the George Soros of their era who were doing all sorts of nasty things to gain absolute control over the economy and the politicians which regulated it. I give a lot of credit to Grover Cleveland and Teddy Roosevelt for seeing through this ruse and cracking down as needed.
A favorite trick of crony capitalists has always been to hamstring the system, claim it doesn't work and then replace it with something which they can control to their advantage.
Free trade is another such example. It is a superb and true concept as preached by Adam Smith. Not so much as perverted by NAFTA and the TPP.
I’ve heard that 38% of United States online sales are now through Amazon - pretty close to becoming a de facto monopoly.
You must have failed reading class and economics class. Adam Smith's the Wealth Of Nations clearly warns against anti-trusts. Please don't spread that BS again.
Thanks.
Adam Smith in his own words:
The interest of the dealers [referring to stock owners, manufacturers, and merchants], however, in any particular branch of trade or manufacture, is always in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the public. To widen the market and to narrow the competition, is always the interest of the dealers. To widen the market may frequently be agreeable enough to the interest of the public; but to narrow the competition must always be against it, and can serve only to enable the dealers, by raising their profits above what they naturally would be, to levy, for their own benefit, and absurd tax upon the rest of their fellow-citizens. (Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 1991), pages 219-220)
That may be true, but the fact is that it is a valid law that has been enforced in other cases. If the behavior breaks the law, then it should be prosecuted. If the law is itself wrong, it should be repealed, but must still be enforced while on the books.
Second of all, it sounds like Trump is threatening to use government power to attack his political enemies — a la Bill Clinton and even Barack Obama.
I disagree with your second reason. By enforcing the law, he is not using government authority to threaten - he is applying the law as written. The abuse of power comes in the form of extra-legal activities, such as the FBI files (for Clinton) and the IRS targeting of conservative groups (for Obama).
Now, if the preponderance of the evidence precludes a valid charge under the existing law (that is, if the law is being stretched to cover a situation that it doesn't actually fit), then using the law becomes a political exercise.
Think that Conservatism allows for and sometimes requires reasonable and limited regulation of the free market to render it fair.
Trust busting came along because of robber barons in the early Twentieth Century. We have the same issue these days with huge corporations killing competition and screwing the middle class.
Yes. Anyone who buys office supplies can see that this merger is probably not in their interest. Besides millions of private citizens this also includes lots of companies and various levels of government.
I believe excessive mergers of corporations and banks has led to “too big to fail” entities and ones that control way too much of our lives.
Yes, I oppose such entities. I also oppose international,monopolies and multinational corporations that are behind the one world government with those entities pulling the strings behind the scenes.