Elizabeth Warren would break up big tech companies

Jan 2015
3,163
2,046
MD
No, it is not. Having exclusive control over a market is.
That isn’t how antitrust laws work. Microsoft caught an antitrust suit in the 90s, and they didn’t control the entire market. They controlled an unreasonably large portion of it that stifled competition. The case is certainly there if they choose to make it.
 
Dec 2018
1,376
480
New England
You have repeatedly rejected the concept of "monopoly" by asserting that some company exists as a competitor. I presented the Microsoft case as an example of a Internet age company that had an anti-trust claim and, yet, had competition. Perhaps you should specify exactly "how much" competition must exist to fulfill your unique idea of "monopoly" because, the FTC does not consider a specific percentage to be "pathognomonic" for a market controlling monopoly.
Biff, just stop. I have not said there are no tech monopolies, so citing a case that went against Microsoft proves absolutely nothing of relevance in this thread. We are discussing Amazon, Facebook, and Google.

You really are king of the straw-men.
 
Nov 2018
2,596
1,212
Montana
Biff, just stop. I have not said there are no tech monopolies, so citing a case that went against Microsoft proves absolutely nothing of relevance in this thread. We are discussing Amazon, Facebook, and Google.

You really are king of the straw-men.
So you DO consider Amazon, Facebook and Google to be monopolies. Why didn't you state that at the start of this discussion?
 
Likes: Clara007
Dec 2018
1,376
480
New England
That isn’t how antitrust laws work. Microsoft caught an antitrust suit in the 90s, and they didn’t control the entire market. They controlled an unreasonably large portion of it that stifled competition. The case is certainly there if they choose to make it.
Gordy, anti-trust laws are not binary. Running afoul of one anti-trust provision does not make the offending company a complete "monopoly." Yes, a company can can dinged for competitive practices, as Microsoft as, and the proper remediation is some form of fine and a change in behavior. Lizzie is talking about breaking up these companies. That is a penalty reserved for Standard Oil type control of a market, which none of these companies possess.

In fact, if you been keeping up with the trade news you'll read about Facebook's position in the market and how it's become so precarious they are completely overhauling their business model and moving to private messaging. Why on earth would a monopoly do something like that?
 
Dec 2018
1,376
480
New England
Nov 2018
2,596
1,212
Montana
Biff, now you're just being a jerk. Please read what I wrote and have the courtesy to respond to it.
There is no real discussion here. You refuse to accept established standards for monopoly and insist on some arbitrary concept you have created for yourself and then decide that Microsoft is not a tech company or Internet company and therefore cannot be used as a comparison to Apple, Google, or Facebook or Amazon or some other arbitrarily chosen collection of companies.

If you do not want to deal with facts and recognize your own bias on a subject, why try to have a conversation at all on a forum with alternative points of view?