Really great work here, David. Thanks for this.
-
-
-
Thanks so much.
ಸಂವಾದದ ಮುಕ್ತಾಯ
ಹೊಸ ಸಂವಾದ -
-
-
Agree that Americans have always been suspicious of anything that gets too big too fast. But on antitrust economics, I'm sticking with Bork. The right question is: where's the harm to consumers? If there was pervasive monopoly power, prices would have gone up. They haven't.pic.twitter.com/ghMn0L5et0
-
Prices are only one of the major costs that affect corporate profits. Wages and tax policy tell a rather different story....
-
Increased market share-concentration-was a traditional approach to measure monopoly power. Bork, Posner, and others showed that what matters is the ability to extract monopoly rents from consumers. And the inflation numbers show that hasn't been happening.
-
ಟ್ವೀಟ್ ಲಭ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲ
-
Fair point, esp. if they aren't bidding in the same talent pool. People in tech though can't find enough qualified people and the labor market is hyper-competitive. But overall, higher productivity is what enables employers to raise wages. Consolidation can increase productivity.
ಸಂವಾದದ ಮುಕ್ತಾಯ
ಹೊಸ ಸಂವಾದ -
-
-
Genuinely curious: how do we know the relationship between this, income growth and entrepreneurship? In a classic merger for market power, prices rise and there is room for some entry. Post-merger, US Steel's market share declined steadily.
-
It's interesting to compare the antitrust merger story in this article with the explanation of higher fixed capital (including IT) resulting in lower marginal costs and lower labor share, as in
@sharatganapati https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3030966 …https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cN0ojJHIN-hrSy3CVIyM-s6diuN35g3a/view …
ಸಂವಾದದ ಮುಕ್ತಾಯ
ಹೊಸ ಸಂವಾದ -
-
-
the jury is still out on almost all of these conclusions! re causal impact of industrial concentration on income growth, entrepreneurship, etc.
-
There is no jury. There will never be a jury. This is purely a political judgment, do you want an economy in which the sinews of industry are held by the many or the few? I choose many.
- 1ಮತ್ತಷ್ಟು ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯೆ
ಹೊಸ ಸಂವಾದ -
-
-
Want entrepreneurship to skyrocket? Go to single payer healthcare.
ಧನ್ಯವಾದಗಳು. Twitter ಇದನ್ನು ನಿಮ್ಮ ಕಾಲರೇಖೆಯನ್ನು ಉತ್ತಮಗೊಳಿಸಲು ಬಳಸುತ್ತದೆ. ರದ್ದುಗೊಳಿಸುರದ್ದುಗೊಳಿಸು
-
-
-
Concentrated capital doesn't innovate, it doesn't need to; it gets its ROI from extraction.
ಧನ್ಯವಾದಗಳು. Twitter ಇದನ್ನು ನಿಮ್ಮ ಕಾಲರೇಖೆಯನ್ನು ಉತ್ತಮಗೊಳಿಸಲು ಬಳಸುತ್ತದೆ. ರದ್ದುಗೊಳಿಸುರದ್ದುಗೊಳಿಸು
-
-
-
That seems an awful big leap, don’t you think? It may make for a good headline, but is the conclusion really warranted?
-
The data in the chart seems cherry picked. While I agree that concentration has increased, (See my paper here - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3030966 … ) the data in the Nyt column is a bit curious. Plus I have no idea how to get the the conclusion on entrepreneurship.
- 1ಮತ್ತಷ್ಟು ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯೆ
ಹೊಸ ಸಂವಾದ -
-
-
Sort of depressing that private prisons is even an industry.
- 1ಮತ್ತಷ್ಟು ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯೆ
ಹೊಸ ಸಂವಾದ -
-
-
Cut regulation that stymie small business growth. Encourage business formation by deregulation small regional banks. Find ways to allow equity investment to start and grow such businesses. Citing the size of large enterprises is just an excuse for progressives to punish success.
-
Can you cite a credible source or study on federal de-regulation improving small business growth? As a small business owner, I've found that most of the regulations that impact us are state level. They usually keep us from harming people or ourselves.
-
Did I say federal? Most barriers for business are local like licensing, helping incumbents. Of course a business like yours considers "protection". Another area is home building which is stymied by local zoning land use. You avoided my mention of capital formation that's federal
ಸಂವಾದದ ಮುಕ್ತಾಯ
ಹೊಸ ಸಂವಾದ -
ಲೋಡಿಂಗ್ ಸಮಯ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಿರುವಂತೆನಿಸುತ್ತದೆ.
Twitter ಸಾಮರ್ಥ್ಯ ಮೀರಿರಬಹುದು ಅಥವಾ ಕ್ಷಣಿಕವಾದ ತೊಂದರೆಯನ್ನು ಅನುಭವಿಸುತ್ತಿರಬಹುದು. ಮತ್ತೆ ಪ್ರಯತ್ನಿಸಿ ಅಥವಾ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಮಾಹಿತಿಗೆ Twitter ಸ್ಥಿತಿಗೆ ಭೇಟಿ ನೀಡಿ.