Hacker News Reader

Comment by yepitwas | Hacker News Reader

Monopolies are a huge problem in every sector of the economy. Republicans and especially Chicago school folks forced a change in how we enforce antitrust in the ‘70s, such that now we hardly enforce it at all. (The resulting concentration of power was, IMO, the first major step toward the entire gestures broadly at everything we’re dealing with now, but putting that aside, it’s definitely been awful for market health in practically every sector)

Trump’s trade policies his first term drove away foreign buyers, who didn’t rush back afterward. US farmers rely on exports, as we farm way more than we need to to feed just the US. We had to (well, “had to”) bail farmers out then, because of Trump’s trade policies, and now we may well do it again for the same fucking reason.

Wonder who they voted for.

View on HN

This is a pattern. Enact shitty policy and then shield red districts from it. Prime example is the MAILS act. Defund the post office then re-fund it in rural districts. Same with rural hospitals. And democrats help them do it because providing help for part of the population is better than none - they should make rural districts suffer the consequences of their votes - I’m tired of subsidizing communities that would not do the same for me.

> they should make rural districts suffer the consequences of their votes - I’m tired of subsidizing communities that would not do the same for me.

being in a society means having a safety net. different people agree on some things and disagree on others. apply the golden rule.

In theory I agree, but it's starting to feel like we need to say "society is not a suicide pact".

> being in a society means having a safety net.

The people in rural areas strongly disagree with that statement.

But perhaps even if true, it doesn’t invalidate the safety net, if we are a society that tries to put a net under people.

I agree and it would be applying the golden rule because ultimately it would benefit these communities.

It’s going to ultimately hurt the US. If our companies don’t have to compete or innovate, the rest of the world will outcompete and out innovate us. We will be the backwater refusing to get with the times.

A few will get to reign in hell, or retreat to their bunkers, or leave with their riches.

I think we need a new word or a new definition for monopoly. Even concentration - whether it is a monopoly or oligopoly or not - is a problem. It’s how Walmart gets away with squeezing farmers and demanding total compliance from them while refusing shipments arbitrarily, keeping them in permanent dependent serfdom.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com