Quote:
Originally Posted by ApK
I think (there's that hedge again....) he means control in the sense of stability and rules, i.e., as opposed to an "out-of-control market," not in the sense of one group controlling others.
|
A very reasonable assumption.
As it happens though, I merely meant that the party "controlling" others, insomuch as they are dominant, is doing so in accordance with the rules of competition and out-innovating the other groups.
Which is not to say that antitrust is supposed to
ensure that any party gains control, merely that they must ensure that that is
how any party which does gain control, does it. I deliberately left in "or group of parties" to imply that a large number of of retailers who split the pie is an acceptable outcome in the government's quest to control the economy
through antitrust.
(Obviously there will be
someone who is edged out and has no control.)
Perhaps I could have been slightly clearer in my wording, which might mean someone
should've reread what I said. How it was instead taken to mean that I advocate the government use antitrust to put a retailer in control...
I have been consistently against that here on MR...
Some people just want to see any Amazon supporters as just as "evil" as Amazon.