The idea that we should stop attempting to enforce our laws solely because we think we might not always win in court is a foolish and dangerous way to run our country. We’ve had decades of corporate consolidation across all industries in America, mostly thanks to lax enforcement of our antitrust laws by previous FTC admins. Pair that with some irresponsible rulings made by our Supreme Court to invite dark corporate money into public affairs, and these corporations have more money and power than any time in recently history. We need more people like her in public service.
Minor quibble with your penultimate sentence: They have more money and power than at ANY time in our history. Much more so than even the last Gilded Age.
For people who don't understand, Khan is actually enforcing anti trust law after 45 years. We used to have 100 military contractors, we now have 5, we used to have many grocery chains on the west coast, we are about to have 1 big one, we used to have 50 big media companies we now have 6 etc etc. There are regional monopolies everywhere that no longer need to compete. They can just price gouge people now. The wsj has written over 70 hit pieces on khan because they are owned by big companies. Anti trust is about making sure power is not in the hands of a small group of people. A.k.a, if you don't like oligopolies then be happy khan is trying to enforce anti trust law. It also seems to be working because mergers are way down.
Although I agree, giving example of military contractor is just a extremely bad choice. We used to have 100 contractors because we were in active war with troops deployed in the front line. considering there is no active war the government should not be funding 100 contractors anyways!
@@panth5501it’s civilian opinions like this that reminds me you mfs actually believe there’s “war and peace”, we’re ALWAYS at war, we’re in the middle of a Cold War right now
Khan is brilliant. She understands the reasons behind inflation- monopolies and oligopolies in charge of almost every sector of the American economy. This harms both consumers and employees. This isn’t the first time we’ve faced this problem, so the are solutions (suggested by classical economics) in place to address it. Those solutions simply need to be applied. Khan has been incredibly effective in doing that and getting the word out. That’s why the big money crowd disdains her and are calling for her removal.
Journal of Wall street criticises FTC. Was this supposed to be informative? Look at her interview at new york economic club if you want her perspective.
Lina Khan and the FTC are doing some of the most important work in the world right now and they don't get a fraction of the recognition they deserve. While congress is raking the middle class over the coals with insider trading, she's putting the future of this country ahead of her own financial gain, and that says a lot about her integrity.
Trying and failing isn’t losing on purpose. She is the only FTC chair in my lifetime that is at least trying. Every other one just didn’t even try. So I respect the fact that she has gotten some wins that others wouldn’t get, and that she is trying to get some even more huge wins.
@@eng3d if you think that then you weren’t alive the past 20 years, because that’s all the previous FTC chairs did. She is the only one attempting to break the chain and finally enact better competition in our markets.
Indeed. Please help taking some control over these mega corps. The Meta/AR company case seemed like a long shot, but just showing they are following up and trying could make them think twice about future mergers.
@@eng3dchanging the guidelines has actually effect on merger law because courts review it when making decisions. So I wouldn't say she is trying to make precedent in favor of monopolies here.
@@MarkJanssen3 failing on purpose so the FTC can figure out the bounds of what they can get away with when it comes to robust antitrust enforcement isn't necessarily a bad thing or a shortcoming. Lisa Khan has made it known that she's aware the FTC will pick up a few losses along the way. So it is possible that taking on riskier Big Tech cases could be part of a smart wider strategy. She may not be winning all her merger challenges, but in the process, she is forcing the courts to affirm some of the legal arguments she is making, steadily accruing small wins in pursuit of bigger wins in the future.
All the tech companies have unlimited budgets...This is like F1 racing where the team with the most money always wins. But she should keep slugging at it. You make enough dents and you can get some cracks going. Maybe rethink strategies to get more damage in. one thing is for sure all these companies need to be broken up.
FTC and their European counterparts didn't have a clue about the gaming industry's organization - a viscously competitive market with little barriers to entry and the consumers have numerous choices. Where was their anti-trust investigative spirit when Comcast, AT&T etc. were fleecing us with their monopolistic internet pricing?
That might be true in america but not in Europe, European regulators are correct to try to rein in Big Tech coz its not just about keeping the industry competitive and preventing monopoly but also about privacy and data. Infact even countries like india is putting pressure on Big tech to stop sending data from india to US bcoz data is the future, lot of future technologies would be trained on data sets and if you are getting it from a country, surely they will want a say on how its used especially when that data contains someone's personal life and everything about that individual
@@exelrode Big data has been the future for the last 20 years, and if the concern is over companies being big and privacy, then investigate it for exactly that. I have a feeling the conclusion would be along the lines 'yes, water is wet'.
@@whyno713 Investigation is only part of the solution, strong framework and laws are another . I have worked in tech including in one of the FAANG so yes i know how much data is important and while i enjoy working with some the brightest in the world, i can't help but notice that how much leeway the govt has given to corporations including big tech in the name of small govt and no govt interference which then give these companies the license to do whatever they want and get away with it.
Entirely unsurprising that institutional-leaning people in a corrupt system are criticizing someone who's trying to reveal cracks in the foundation they're all standing on. "Well, I disagree with what she's doing!" says a paradigm-blind person benefiting from and reinforcing a broken system.
Give me a break... losing creates a bad precedent as suppose to what? Just letting things happen? You're telling me you don't want the FTC to try because losing might look bad so they should just let big players do whatever they want... You're in another world buddy.
I find it ridiculous that there are people on both sides of the aisle who criticize her efforts to increase competition and prevent monopolies - even partial monopolies - from having an outsize influence on this country. Anyone who opposes that doesn't understand how the economy works ... or is supposed to.
yeah it does feel like she is losing on purpose. but it also highlight the fact that our laws are too lax in controlling these mega trillion dollar companies
@@furtsmagee1513 so there is no Asian or European stake in this? "...are owned by Americans and American pensions/retirements" so rest of the world should not rely on this exclusively us ventures..
Would they demand recusal if she had financial ties? Recusal for past criticism is laughable. This woman is a hero and the object of a big money witch hunt.
ill prepared is a nice way of putting it, they are wasting their "limited budget" on bad cases. Perfect example is the within case, in what world was that acquisition of a fitness VR app only worth about $300 million a threat, the current FTC doesn't care about anything besides their political stance. Even deals like the Activision acquisition I would argue were a waste of resources since their entire argument came down to 1 point..."protect Sony" which could of just be covered with a remedy and if Microsoft hypothetically did ignore the remedy that would of been the perfect oppitunity to make an example of ignoring guidelines by trying to reverse the merger or something major like that
That's too simplistic an argument. Even a verdict that allows a merger to go forward can require the merging companies to divest some assets, or undertake to/not to engage in certain kinds of behavior post-merger.
The way you do business in North America yes she’s right she’s very right it’s wrong it’s not helping the American public and quite frankly I think it’s obvious how many more homeless people do you need to convey the message
The FTC was also arguing for Sony through out the entirety of the Microsoft case and they’re still arguing in Sonys favor with their appeal process. Literally protecting another corporation. Not consumers.
I feel like you just learned about it from the wsj or something. The actual microsoft case was clearly misunderstood by the judge and that made people who don't understand the argument think it was about call of duty or to help sony which is amazing that people think that. It was about the future of the gaming market and the consolidation that has occurred and has been occurring and future games. Cod was just one of many examples provided.
@@raggedflaggon9566 I feel like you dont understand the case and got your facts from a Khan fan club blog or something. Numerous regulatory around the world have agreed that the case was stupid and no harm would come to consumers. Do you think you know more about law than Japan, Australia, German, UK, Canada, Eu combined? There wasn't a case, Khan was just focused on big names and saw a big company making a big purchase.
My view on this is that taking steps in deals such as Activision MS merge is set up to loose because gaming industry cant be just monopol. You can literally develop indie game in 1 person that sells more than big gaming companies. This is more of creative sector then technology sector IMO.
huh, negative framing of the Wall Street Journal (like the "interview" with the NYT on her "AGGRESSIVE Strategy" here on YT)? Ty, actually for the exposure of your arguments in a rather objective way. Personally I am curious what will happen to the FTC proposal against non-compete clauses - a practice that is unlawful here in Europe. Greetings.
Go girl go and even the wall street journal which is owned by people that want to sell you something even if it’s news go after who you need to go after. You have my blessing and trust Lena.
She needs an administration that will stand firmly behind her. We have antitrust laws for a reason. Thank you, TR. remember true capitalism welcome competition. That’s what’s best for the customer. Go get them young lady. Never let them see you sweat.
C. Biden is right you do have a competition problem in the United States. It’s very clear your way of conducting business is definitely a night I trust issue.
Sounds a little like little David against Goliath. Brave soul. She seems to be tussling along a major social fault line of US culture. Is this the stuff of civil war-esque conflict? Will they offer her a Solicitor Generalship to alleviate the pressure?
She's trying to make sure that companies don't have too much power over prices. Read a little bit about the gilded age, how Rockefeller fixed oil prices, J.P. Morgan fixed steel prices after buying US Steel from Andrew Carnegie and how it took Henry Ford breaking the law to bring car prices down to a price average people could afford.
Why? Cause in America corporations ARE the govt. As for the anti-case against Microsoft for purchasing Blizzard.... nothing to worry about; Blizzard is a DEAD gaming shop and nothing can bring back the glory of Blizzard titles.
The Consumer Welfare Standard? So if we aren't around, what are you guys going to do for income or is just once again, easier to 'Hoard', our wealth. Deny us employment, throw us to the state, and clip the ticket all the way around. (The worst of any 'Monopoly). :(
Crazyman probably would have not sought the break-up Standard Oil, nor sought the break-up of AT&T in 1980s. Laissez-faire about role of government’s influence over business. As a younger Crazyman, Crazyman did have issues with others, given different specific issues and law at the time.
Are cryptocurrency and business incompatible? I think youre not keeping up with the news. While you thought it was impossible, some enthusiasts from Cannafarm Ltd integrated cryptocurrency into the production of medical cannabis. What do you say now?
She reminds me Hermione from Harry Potter books: fighting for justice and criticising status quo from early stages of career/academia, and still not likable by the people around her. Not a supporter (I am not from the US), just sharing who she reminds me.
so shes not following the law, she bringing cases based on her personal opinion on what laws should be. This is why she keeps losing in federal courts.
Her first big problem is that Amazon does not have a monopoly. Online retail is only about 16% of total US retail. Amazon does currently have 38% of the online retail. The competition in online retail is a group of smaller businesses which are growing fast. Amazon realy started this online retail so has a bigger share. In past legal cases in the US only companies that control more than 50% might be considered to be a monopoly. So Amazon cannot have monopolistic powers if it is not a monopoly. Khan should have recused herself, she is biased. Her thesis on Amazon admited that based on current antitrust law Amazon would not be found guilty. What she wants is a rewrite of antitrust law. Lastly much of her claims are just rubbish. She says it´s difficult to cancel prime you have to go through various screens, are you sure you want to leave have a look at our better offer, you still want to leave are you realy sure, OK go to this screen and cancel it. Has she ever tried buying an airline ticket with Easyjet or Ryan air without paying for various other extras. Both airlines don´t make a lot of money on the tickets it can easily cost more to take on hand luggage all the profits come from the large number of add ons. Ryan Air and Easyjet are not monopolies. Amazon sometimes sells similiar products to their sellers at a cheaper price. True, now go have a look around Walmart, they also sometimes do the same thing as do the other supermarket chains. Why are they cheaper, Walmart is big enough to get a cheaper price, Walmart don´t make the items. Plus the consumer gets more choice and cheaper prices. I think Khan is going to lose this case and not get renewed in 2024.
"coercive behaviors in the market" ... there is no such thing as market coercion, by definition. A market is only created by (and to the degree that) the initiation of force is extracted from human interactions. political power = the power of the gun / force market power = the power to make you an offer ; the power to create (not force) free market monopoly is a contradiction in terms
She isn’t losing. The previous heads of the FTC would only bring iron clad cases to court and then would settle instead of winning large cases.
The idea that we should stop attempting to enforce our laws solely because we think we might not always win in court is a foolish and dangerous way to run our country. We’ve had decades of corporate consolidation across all industries in America, mostly thanks to lax enforcement of our antitrust laws by previous FTC admins. Pair that with some irresponsible rulings made by our Supreme Court to invite dark corporate money into public affairs, and these corporations have more money and power than any time in recently history. We need more people like her in public service.
Minor quibble with your penultimate sentence:
They have more money and power than at ANY time in our history. Much more so than even the last Gilded Age.
The WSJ publishes an anti-Khan article on average once every 10 days.
You guys sure are in the tank!
This ☝🏼
For people who don't understand, Khan is actually enforcing anti trust law after 45 years. We used to have 100 military contractors, we now have 5, we used to have many grocery chains on the west coast, we are about to have 1 big one, we used to have 50 big media companies we now have 6 etc etc. There are regional monopolies everywhere that no longer need to compete. They can just price gouge people now. The wsj has written over 70 hit pieces on khan because they are owned by big companies. Anti trust is about making sure power is not in the hands of a small group of people. A.k.a, if you don't like oligopolies then be happy khan is trying to enforce anti trust law. It also seems to be working because mergers are way down.
Although I agree, giving example of military contractor is just a extremely bad choice. We used to have 100 contractors because we were in active war with troops deployed in the front line. considering there is no active war the government should not be funding 100 contractors anyways!
@@panth5501 Did the 100 whittle down to 5 AFTER the war era ended? I don't think so - they've been merging gradually, over time.
@@panth5501 No, that is not true. Not at all. The contractors merged and largely to consolidate political power.
Well said. The fix was in and now they are upset because the cops didn't stay bought.
@@panth5501it’s civilian opinions like this that reminds me you mfs actually believe there’s “war and peace”, we’re ALWAYS at war, we’re in the middle of a Cold War right now
Khan is brilliant. She understands the reasons behind inflation- monopolies and oligopolies in charge of almost every sector of the American economy. This harms both consumers and employees. This isn’t the first time we’ve faced this problem, so the are solutions (suggested by classical economics) in place to address it. Those solutions simply need to be applied.
Khan has been incredibly effective in doing that and getting the word out. That’s why the big money crowd disdains her and are calling for her removal.
Journal of Wall street criticises FTC. Was this supposed to be informative? Look at her interview at new york economic club if you want her perspective.
WSJ supports corporations and big businesses.
@@gund89123 WSJ is run by Murdoch who also runs Faux News. They would criticize a Biden appointee for curing cancer.
Lina Khan and the FTC are doing some of the most important work in the world right now and they don't get a fraction of the recognition they deserve. While congress is raking the middle class over the coals with insider trading, she's putting the future of this country ahead of her own financial gain, and that says a lot about her integrity.
Shes putting her personal opinions before the law which is why the courts, an independent and separate branch of government, keeps smacking her down.
Laws are just opinions from those who preceded us.@@birdstwin1186
She is going after Microsoft for no reason. She should be deported back to Pakistan
Too much heartache. Not a fan of hers.
And failing, because they're wrong.
She's not losing, but the WSJ and its readers are worried that they might actually start having to comply with, y'know, laws.
Trying and failing isn’t losing on purpose. She is the only FTC chair in my lifetime that is at least trying. Every other one just didn’t even try. So I respect the fact that she has gotten some wins that others wouldn’t get, and that she is trying to get some even more huge wins.
It is the opposite, she is failing on purpose and creating a precedent
@@eng3d if you think that then you weren’t alive the past 20 years, because that’s all the previous FTC chairs did. She is the only one attempting to break the chain and finally enact better competition in our markets.
Indeed. Please help taking some control over these mega corps. The Meta/AR company case seemed like a long shot, but just showing they are following up and trying could make them think twice about future mergers.
@@eng3dchanging the guidelines has actually effect on merger law because courts review it when making decisions. So I wouldn't say she is trying to make precedent in favor of monopolies here.
@@MarkJanssen3 failing on purpose so the FTC can figure out the bounds of what they can get away with when it comes to robust antitrust enforcement isn't necessarily a bad thing or a shortcoming. Lisa Khan has made it known that she's aware the FTC will pick up a few losses along the way. So it is possible that taking on riskier Big Tech cases could be part of a smart wider strategy. She may not be winning all her merger challenges, but in the process, she is forcing the courts to affirm some of the legal arguments she is making, steadily accruing small wins in pursuit of bigger wins in the future.
Gives a whole new meaning to The Wrath of Khan. 😅😅😅😅
Go Lina go! Someone has to take these people on!
All the tech companies have unlimited budgets...This is like F1 racing where the team with the most money always wins. But she should keep slugging at it. You make enough dents and you can get some cracks going. Maybe rethink strategies to get more damage in. one thing is for sure all these companies need to be broken up.
FTC and their European counterparts didn't have a clue about the gaming industry's organization - a viscously competitive market with little barriers to entry and the consumers have numerous choices. Where was their anti-trust investigative spirit when Comcast, AT&T etc. were fleecing us with their monopolistic internet pricing?
Hypocrisy maybe
That might be true in america but not in Europe, European regulators are correct to try to rein in Big Tech coz its not just about keeping the industry competitive and preventing monopoly but also about privacy and data. Infact even countries like india is putting pressure on Big tech to stop sending data from india to US bcoz data is the future, lot of future technologies would be trained on data sets and if you are getting it from a country, surely they will want a say on how its used especially when that data contains someone's personal life and everything about that individual
Isn't that the purpose of a new head and culture shift?
@@exelrode Big data has been the future for the last 20 years, and if the concern is over companies being big and privacy, then investigate it for exactly that. I have a feeling the conclusion would be along the lines 'yes, water is wet'.
@@whyno713 Investigation is only part of the solution, strong framework and laws are another . I have worked in tech including in one of the FAANG so yes i know how much data is important and while i enjoy working with some the brightest in the world, i can't help but notice that how much leeway the govt has given to corporations including big tech in the name of small govt and no govt interference which then give these companies the license to do whatever they want and get away with it.
Entirely unsurprising that institutional-leaning people in a corrupt system are criticizing someone who's trying to reveal cracks in the foundation they're all standing on.
"Well, I disagree with what she's doing!" says a paradigm-blind person benefiting from and reinforcing a broken system.
Give me a break... losing creates a bad precedent as suppose to what? Just letting things happen?
You're telling me you don't want the FTC to try because losing might look bad so they should just let big players do whatever they want...
You're in another world buddy.
We LOVE Lina Khan!!!
I find it ridiculous that there are people on both sides of the aisle who criticize her efforts to increase competition and prevent monopolies - even partial monopolies - from having an outsize influence on this country. Anyone who opposes that doesn't understand how the economy works ... or is supposed to.
yeah it does feel like she is losing on purpose. but it also highlight the fact that our laws are too lax in controlling these mega trillion dollar companies
These trillion dollar companies are owned by Americans and American pensions/retirements
Abolish the FTC, khan is a bully
@@furtsmagee1513 so there is no Asian or European stake in this? "...are owned by Americans and American pensions/retirements" so rest of the world should not rely on this exclusively us ventures..
@@ikematthews6866There are bigger bullies in our politics you should worry about.
@@frenchcat2910 who? Anti trust is one the biggest violations in law
Would they demand recusal if she had financial ties? Recusal for past criticism is laughable. This woman is a hero and the object of a big money witch hunt.
Still…She is onto something!
Well she beat google, you shills
Smooth of WSJ to show their mention in Lina's paper. Hehe.
Might explain this video.😏
It’s about time! Kick some corporate, hedge fund, and private equity but
She isnt. WSJ stake holders are. FU. Good job Lina.
The resolve and power she carries in such a small frame is truly remarkable.
No, a loss is a loss. The tech industry is consolidating, and the FTC's actual case arguments seem ill-prepared.
ill prepared is a nice way of putting it, they are wasting their "limited budget" on bad cases. Perfect example is the within case, in what world was that acquisition of a fitness VR app only worth about $300 million a threat, the current FTC doesn't care about anything besides their political stance. Even deals like the Activision acquisition I would argue were a waste of resources since their entire argument came down to 1 point..."protect Sony" which could of just be covered with a remedy and if Microsoft hypothetically did ignore the remedy that would of been the perfect oppitunity to make an example of ignoring guidelines by trying to reverse the merger or something major like that
That's too simplistic an argument. Even a verdict that allows a merger to go forward can require the merging companies to divest some assets, or undertake to/not to engage in certain kinds of behavior post-merger.
@aritragupta4182 Simplistic but accurate.
Better to try and fail than have never tried at all. And it only takes one big win to make all the other losses fall away.
By Lina Khan's own admission the FTC is outgunned. Maybe they just need more resources.
The way you do business in North America yes she’s right she’s very right it’s wrong it’s not helping the American public and quite frankly I think it’s obvious how many more homeless people do you need to convey the message
The FTC was also arguing for Sony through out the entirety of the Microsoft case and they’re still arguing in Sonys favor with their appeal process. Literally protecting another corporation. Not consumers.
Competition is better for consumers.
She's fantastic.
Define win. She may not want to win...but to subdue/reduce.
That Microsoft case was a joke. They clearly didn't understand the video game market.
I feel like you just learned about it from the wsj or something. The actual microsoft case was clearly misunderstood by the judge and that made people who don't understand the argument think it was about call of duty or to help sony which is amazing that people think that. It was about the future of the gaming market and the consolidation that has occurred and has been occurring and future games. Cod was just one of many examples provided.
@@raggedflaggon9566 I feel like you dont understand the case and got your facts from a Khan fan club blog or something. Numerous regulatory around the world have agreed that the case was stupid and no harm would come to consumers. Do you think you know more about law than Japan, Australia, German, UK, Canada, Eu combined? There wasn't a case, Khan was just focused on big names and saw a big company making a big purchase.
@@birdstwin1186well i wonder whats happening now. Microsoft is now increasing prices
@@8BitTerra Then buy a non-Microsoft game. There are tons of shooters better than call of duty. There are even free to play games lol.
@@GabrielNichothey’re all either owned by Microsoft, Sony or Tensin barring CSGO.
Khan is not losing. Let's see how President Harris treats her. Will she keep her?
Like Wayne Gretsky said, "You miss 100% of the shots you never take".
She might save the tech industry from itself. It is sad that she is facing obstacles like that.
anshulmishra usa flag pfp
She might destroy the FTC while shes at it.
Finally, somebody realizes we have a monopoly crisis. Thank you Mr. Biden for pointing that out you are so right.
Maybe the consolidation of power should be considered consumer harm, as those consolidated organizations will lobby, and limit jobs opportunities.
Heads up Corporations - People think this is Great !!
Wow. Warrior though and through. We have rights because of people like Lina Kahn.
She is Amazing.
My view on this is that taking steps in deals such as Activision MS merge is set up to loose because gaming industry cant be just monopol. You can literally develop indie game in 1 person that sells more than big gaming companies. This is more of creative sector then technology sector IMO.
Name an indie game that has sold more than big games...99% of them sell very little.
@@GamerbyDesign idk, stardew, binding of isaac? Hades? All Indie survivals done in teams of copule people. Entry cost for game industry is pretty low.
@@GamerbyDesign I mean Minecraft was an indie game once.
Thank you
When you present a case as competitor rep. in court instead of the customer right, they deserved it.
huh, negative framing of the Wall Street Journal (like the "interview" with the NYT on her "AGGRESSIVE Strategy" here on YT)? Ty, actually for the exposure of your arguments in a rather objective way. Personally I am curious what will happen to the FTC proposal against non-compete clauses - a practice that is unlawful here in Europe. Greetings.
Lina’s ruffling a lot of feathers on the republican side. Keep shaking trees girl! You’re on to something.
Go girl go and even the wall street journal which is owned by people that want to sell you something even if it’s news go after who you need to go after. You have my blessing and trust Lena.
Dayum parents not proud.. this is worse than getting 89% in math shiiiii
Big tech corporation paranoia is a psychological disorder.
She needs an administration that will stand firmly behind her. We have antitrust laws for a reason. Thank you, TR. remember true capitalism welcome competition. That’s what’s best for the customer. Go get them young lady. Never let them see you sweat.
FTC IS NOT LOSING AGAINST BIG TECH
C. Biden is right you do have a competition problem in the United States. It’s very clear your way of conducting business is definitely a night I trust issue.
Sounds a little like little David against Goliath. Brave soul. She seems to be tussling along a major social fault line of US culture. Is this the stuff of civil war-esque conflict? Will they offer her a Solicitor Generalship to alleviate the pressure?
Can someone explain in simple words what was explained from 3:30. What is she trying to accomplish ?
She's trying to make sure that companies don't have too much power over prices. Read a little bit about the gilded age, how Rockefeller fixed oil prices, J.P. Morgan fixed steel prices after buying US Steel from Andrew Carnegie and how it took Henry Ford breaking the law to bring car prices down to a price average people could afford.
She’s trying to create competition, prevent creating monopoly.
4 companies control 75% of beef processing plants.
so when are you guys hiring a new sound guy? i'm still available lmk.
I think its important to what is need for the public.
Enforcers dont think...so its not about the law, but pressure and PR
Big tech needs to be reined in ASAP.
Hope khan can do it
I wonder if she's a lawyer. You would think you wouldn't bring something to court as the gov't unless you were sure you would win.
She beat google. If the system had any sense she would have stopped the microsoft acquisition.
Republican or democratic lia khan is a Rockstar for the people.
Today is October 30th 2024....how does this feel now WSJ??
Why? Cause in America corporations ARE the govt. As for the anti-case against Microsoft for purchasing Blizzard.... nothing to worry about; Blizzard is a DEAD gaming shop and nothing can bring back the glory of Blizzard titles.
No thumbs up or down. As all you are doing is 'Polarising', with this article. :( :)
The Consumer Welfare Standard? So if we aren't around, what are you guys going to do for income or is just once again, easier to 'Hoard', our wealth. Deny us employment, throw us to the state, and clip the ticket all the way around. (The worst of any 'Monopoly). :(
Keep going girl! All it takes is one big win and then the dominos start to fall.
why? it's difficult to know who is stealing more data and money
Crazyman probably would have not sought the break-up Standard Oil, nor sought the break-up of AT&T in 1980s. Laissez-faire about role of government’s influence over business. As a younger Crazyman, Crazyman did have issues with others, given different specific issues and law at the time.
AT&T breakup didn’t do anything. Just created a bunch of local monopolies.
@@furtsmagee1513
That's wasn't the only possible result. That was a local policy choice.
We need more people like Lina Khan in the world.
😮
Yall should watch her interview with jon Stewart
'Everyone has a price' --Pablo Escobar
Trillion dollar companies with unlimited funds greasing palms here and there, are never going to lose.
She is good at beefin.
Little bias there WALL STREET journal
your Lina videos are always so negatively charged towards her, hold this downvote.
came to lima khan footage but heard your voice
Hey, when will you talk about the real company Cannafarm Ltd that brings profit?
Corporations and big business have lot of influence & Money.
Meta and Microsoft are like two peas stuck in one pod. If the other one falls, then the other might cling on, but will also fall down in the end.
Two very different companies
So she is just an academic and never actually worked in the industry. Well that explains a lot.
Government needs to stay out of private enterprise. We need a free market.
Free enterprise needs to stay out of government. We need a democracy.
@@Jot240 I love this response lol. I tend to agree with both of you guys.
@@good8072 about agreeing with both - but don't you think lack of regulations is bad for consumers and employees?
I didn't hear any beefs when T-Mobile bought Mint Mobile this year...shhhh...nothing to see here.
That deal was approved in 2020. Lina Khan came to the FTC in 2021. She didn't have any say in it.
Are cryptocurrency and business incompatible? I think youre not keeping up with the news. While you thought it was impossible, some enthusiasts from Cannafarm Ltd integrated cryptocurrency into the production of medical cannabis. What do you say now?
Pretty interisting
This didn't age well.
She reminds me Hermione from Harry Potter books: fighting for justice and criticising status quo from early stages of career/academia, and still not likable by the people around her. Not a supporter (I am not from the US), just sharing who she reminds me.
Winning these cases should be easy. The fact it isn't shows our laws are way too lax to properly regulate these mega corporations.
The way she talks, that smirky smile and the face expressions tell you the kind of person she is.
Someone who's not taking the economic and political dogma that everyone else is espousing seriously? 🙂
@@ryan.m.weisgerber Pretty much, yes
@@hahidalgo21 :D
Woke Inc by Vivek Ramaswamy is a very important book on Big tech and government
There is something wrong with her...Not sure what!!!!
Yes she is not a sellout. I guess that is strange these days in a world full of coruption....
who names someone chair
Love it, love her 😊
What a legend
It’s losing because Ms. kahn is the worst head of the FTC to ever live
so shes not following the law, she bringing cases based on her personal opinion on what laws should be. This is why she keeps losing in federal courts.
She will never win, needs to be fired.
Her first big problem is that Amazon does not have a monopoly. Online retail is only about 16% of total US retail. Amazon does currently have 38% of the online retail. The competition in online retail is a group of smaller businesses which are growing fast. Amazon realy started this online retail so has a bigger share. In past legal cases in the US only companies that control more than 50% might be considered to be a monopoly. So Amazon cannot have monopolistic powers if it is not a monopoly. Khan should have recused herself, she is biased. Her thesis on Amazon admited that based on current antitrust law Amazon would not be found guilty. What she wants is a rewrite of antitrust law. Lastly much of her claims are just rubbish. She says it´s difficult to cancel prime you have to go through various screens, are you sure you want to leave have a look at our better offer, you still want to leave are you realy sure, OK go to this screen and cancel it. Has she ever tried buying an airline ticket with Easyjet or Ryan air without paying for various other extras. Both airlines don´t make a lot of money on the tickets it can easily cost more to take on hand luggage all the profits come from the large number of add ons. Ryan Air and Easyjet are not monopolies. Amazon sometimes sells similiar products to their sellers at a cheaper price. True, now go have a look around Walmart, they also sometimes do the same thing as do the other supermarket chains. Why are they cheaper, Walmart is big enough to get a cheaper price, Walmart don´t make the items. Plus the consumer gets more choice and cheaper prices. I think Khan is going to lose this case and not get renewed in 2024.
Irrelevant.
The FTC is also charged with trust busting.
Ok
"coercive behaviors in the market" ... there is no such thing as market coercion, by definition. A market is only created by (and to the degree that) the initiation of force is extracted from human interactions.
political power = the power of the gun / force
market power = the power to make you an offer ; the power to create (not force)
free market monopoly is a contradiction in terms
^dude who has never taken any class in history or economics
good argument!@@airtale.p
@@airtale.p
Yep.
Lena Khan for president. Down with monopoly’s.
タカイ違いっぽいよね
They hired a woman???? Basically a guarantee lost
Microsoft Activision is still under investigation by the EU
EU gave microsoft the greenlight, I think you mean the UK
first