Hacker News Reader

Comment by ForHackernews | Hacker News Reader

Bizarre take:

> The USA needs an equivalent of China's State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR). This regulatory body generally prevents this tech platform monpoly nonsense

I guess the author is completely unfamiliar with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law

View on HN

Maybe author means we should actually enforce our antitrust laws that are on the books, on their merits.

Rather than the multi-decade consensus "if it lowers consumer prices in short term its ok" or 2024+ "if they donate to my ballroom, they get a pass".

The author's argument is that the current system in the US isn't working, so we do need an equivalent of a system that actually works.

Note that the author specified a regulatory agency, not a law. Laws are great, but they need strong and vigilant agents to enforce them.

You didn't need a centralized regulatory agency to enforce a law. Even federal laws, if they're written so, can be prosecuted by individual states or even individual persons. Some aspects of antitrust law already work this way.

Doing so can prevent regulatory capture and shelter enforcement from the vicissitudes of politics. It also doesn't require maintaining a government workforce. OTOH, you have to be careful what you ask for. Unless a law is very narrowly tailored then ubiquitous enforcement can have it's own problems, e.g. CEQA.

The Sherman Antitrust Act specifically provides individuals harmed by a monopoly a cause of action to sue in federal court.

Megacorps have endless budgets for this sort of thing. The deck is heavily stacked. What's to gain by pretending it ain't so?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com