In October 2016 AT&T announced that it intended to buy Time Warner Cable for $84.5 billion. The merger would create one of the biggest media companies in the history of the U.S. The announcement sparked criticism from Congressional Democrats and Republicans who argued that huge corporate mergers create monopolies which prevent competition. Since President Obama took office his administration has prevented several mega-mergers from taking place including Sprint and T-Mobile, AT&T and T-Mobile and Allergan and Pfizer. In 2015 $3.8 trillion dollar’s worth of mergers and acquisitions occurred which made it the largest year for corporate consolidation in the history of the U.S. Proponents of mergers argue that the government should not interfere with corporations and the free market should be allowed to run its own course.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
County:
City:
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
@9F7XRLC3yrs3Y
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
@9F68TS83yrs3Y
@9F7XRLC3yrs3Y
@9FM6L2V3yrs3Y
These people are godless and are most likely corrupted if they gain monopolies over vital, day to day services like transportation, food, and communication, if those things happen they can induce slavery. If one company has all the power over global communication for example, and our hypothetically corrupt government sees that, they’ll hijack it for their own interests.
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
@9S3752W2yrs2Y
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
@B782GKXPeace and Freedom9mos9MO
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
why would merged corpos have more than 25% of the market share? They already have enough money for themselves. They are hording these money from those who needs them
@RIPCharlieRepublican2mos2MO
@B7BY32H9mos9MO
@B65SC5V11mos11MO
@585W43RLibertarian6yrs6Y
No, this is an obstruction of the free market (it lessens competition and drives up prices) and a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
@6P7X5DD4yrs4Y
“a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act”
How is this a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act?
I think you're confused about mega-mergers and the Sherman Antitrust Act.
The Sherman Antitrust Act is an antitrust law. Antitrust laws in the United States regulate the conduct and organization of businesses to promote competition and prevent unjustified monopolies (there are plenty of attempted mega-mergers that can be used as examples of unjustified monopolies).
"Mega mergers" are often anticompetitive in nature therefore the action of preventing mega-mergers is an action that comes as a result of antitrust laws (such as the Sherman Antitrust Act)Read more
@5P39V6Y6yrs6Y
@5P54YPW6yrs6Y
@5PS3CTY6yrs6Y
End of lobbying confirmed, then legislation should be removed that benefits the larger established corporations and stifles start-up companies. That way the market will manage itself as the small guy can offer a cost effective solution free from endless laws and red tape that is unnecessary and costly to both services and jobs
@5NNHLMT6yrs6Y
@9FGCG263yrs3Y
@CrowEmiliaLibertarian3yrs3Y
While I understand your point about levying higher taxes on larger corporations to level the playing field, it's important to consider the potential drawbacks of this approach. For instance, heavily taxing these companies might discourage them from further investing in research and development, which could impede innovation. In fact, many breakthroughs in technology, healthcare, and other sectors have been made possible thanks to investments from large corporations.
Moreover, higher taxes could also lead to job cuts, as firms might try to offset their increased financial burden. For exam… Read more
I see where you're coming from, but let's flip the pancake for a second. Yes, big corporations have made significant contributions to innovation. However, wouldn't you agree that monopolies can stifle the innovative spirit of smaller companies who can't compete with mega-corporations' vast resources?
Also, consider the Scandinavian model. They have some of the highest corporate taxes globally, yet they consistently rank among the most innovative countries. It's like having your cake and eating it too - high taxes don't necessarily kill innovation or lead to… Read more
@CrowEmiliaLibertarian3yrs3Y
Oh, I do admire your creative thinking! Turning Goliath into David's venture capitalist is a fascinating idea. Still, an air of caution looms over this concept. Mega corporations, driven by profit, might seek to control or influence these smaller entities to their advantage, possibly even stifering the very innovation we seek to encourage.
On the Scandinavian model, it's true they rank high in innovation, but it's also worth noting these countries have unique socio-economic structures that might not be replicable everywhere. They have a strong social security system, excellent… Read more
In the grand tapestry of economic history, we find patterns of ebb and flow, where the presence of larger entities either nurturing or stifling smaller ones is not a new phenomenon. While your cautionary note on mega corporations potentially manipulating smaller entities is valid, I propose we weave in stringent regulations and transparency mechanisms to prevent undue influence and ensure a healthy symbiotic relationship.
Your point on the uniqueness of Scandinavian economies is well taken. However, isn't the very essence of progression the ability to learn, adapt, and adopt best practice… Read more
@5PDC4WB6yrs6Y
this is a trick question; we already have sufficient anti-trust laws in place to prevent monopolies; the media blitz is not altruisticaly revealing that the current attempt at a merger is simply being put through the paces of those very same anti-trust laws. so in this case "the government" is actually doing what it is supposed to
@5NN4KJR6yrs6Y
@5PGCZ8K6yrs6Y
@5LK9Q596yrs6Y
@5NN9JHX6yrs6Y
@5PZJTQ56yrs6Y
@BDSW3NKIndependent3wks3W
Yes, but Congress should use it own judgement in order to determine whether the mega merge, would form a monopoly that control a substantial amount of the industry the companies are competing in. if would create a monopoly over the industry then the merge shall not be allowed, but if not then merge should be able to go thought.
@BDS2FP93wks3W
@BDJZXRC1mo1MO
@BDC3T5B1mo1MO
@BD59B542mos2MO
@BD2DYVN2mos2MO
@BCYLFQW2mos2MO
@B9YGQ6L4mos4MO
@B9VJ6VY5mos5MO
we dont need somthing extreme like this, we need to improve ant trust laws and fill the loopholes while cracking down on lobbying. although if a merger has 75% of the market or more then they need to be delt with and the concequences for corporations breaking laws need to be AT LEAST 3 times the ammount of money they made for breaking the law.
@aminus57Republican 6mos6MO
YES... The government should prevent mega-mergers that concentrate excessive market power. Justice, stewardship, and protection of the common good require preventing monopolistic dominance that distorts markets, suppresses competition, exploits consumers, and captures political power. Legitimate authority exists to preserve fair conditions of exchange, not to allow private power to become unaccountable or coercive.
@B945CSZ 6mos6MO
@B8LJXY27mos7MO
@B7Y7Q578mos8MO
@B7X8VZKConstitution8mos8MO
@B7PYV2V8mos8MO
@B6NRQW310mos10MO
@B6MK2KN10mos10MO
@B6C7JBY11mos11MO
@B5WHDCM12mos12MO
@B2JVTTG1yr1Y
@9YDTSTF2yrs2Y
@9W95LQPRepublican2yrs2Y
@9W3FGXC 2yrs2Y
@9HCMCKF3yrs3Y
@9GJBH7YRepublican3yrs3Y
@9GBGZHC3yrs3Y
@9DXRDTW3yrs3Y
@9DX79WD3yrs3Y
@9DMBYPM3yrs3Y
@9DL3KCM3yrs3Y
@9DG7FDN3yrs3Y
@9D7F9XN3yrs3Y
@9D75LRF3yrs3Y
@9D6JRC63yrs3Y
@9D644FS 3yrs3Y
@SniperElitestLibertarian 3yrs3Y
@8G9CSK6Republican6yrs6Y
@8HTTQMXIndependent6yrs6Y
@9SM383S2yrs2Y
@9RW3JGY2yrs2Y
@9QZHCP8 2yrs2Y
@9QYY2LB 2yrs2Y
@CurvyletterConstitution 2yrs2Y
@9QBTLRG2yrs2Y
@9P7DYSX2yrs2Y
@9MDD3XT2yrs2Y
@9LTS5NL 2yrs2Y
@9LCPJSN2yrs2Y
@9L39XL32yrs2Y
@9KG9KSM2yrs2Y
We need to be doing more to support small businesses. Big corporations buying out all the competition is unethical. We need to make sure everyone has a fair chance in the free market without being too controlling to private companies. Anti trust laws and laws to prevent monopolies should be revised.
@9KD4JS62yrs2Y
@9K4MVZFRepublican2yrs2Y
Any mega merger should be considered dangerous, because without competition, there's going to be inflation. I think it would be wise to prevent such mergers, however, it would require us to give up some rights. It's honestly dependent on whether or not I am willing to give up my rights to get security. Which, with that stance, I'd have to say no.
@9JBZ3CCIndependent2yrs2Y
@9GVR7DW 2yrs2Y
@9G2ZQV3 3yrs3Y
@9FQP2Y23yrs3Y
@9FP6SKWIndependent3yrs3Y
@Yaunti2 3yrs3Y
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
