NireBryce

reality is the battlefield

the first line goes in Cohost embeds

๐Ÿฅ I am not embroiled in any legal battle
๐Ÿฆ other than battles that are legal ๐ŸŽฎ

I speak to the universe and it speaks back, in it's own way.

mastodon

email: contact at breadthcharge dot net

I live on the northeast coast of the US.

'non-functional programmer'. 'far left'.

conceptual midwife.

https://cohost.org/NireBryce/post/4929459-here-s-my-five-minut

If you can see the "show contact info" dropdown below, I follow you. If you want me to, ask and I'll think about it.

You must log in to comment.

in reply to @NireBryce's post:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/2 (US)

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

but again, only nominally law, there's plenty of ways to squirrel out of it

Sure, but the Reagan administration looked carefully at the law and, upon detailed review, said "don't care." So in the United States, from then up until Lina Khan, it was only "anti-competitive" if the company said that it was doing it to raise prices. If it didn't plan that, then meh, prices would probably go down from economies of scale, and the consumer would magically benefit.

What do you mean "that sounds just like the same explanation for trickle-down economics"...?