
Elizabeth Warren vows to break up tech giants if elected in 2020 - edward
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47509945
======
natch
Ugh. I am a person who accepts that government sometimes has an appropriate
role in regulating things. Sometimes.

And I am not an unquestioning fanboy of any of the three mentioned companies.

But she seems to be aiming in the wrong direction.

First, we should err on the side of letting markets be free.

But if there is anything that deserves intervention, broadband monopolies are
a much bigger problem imho than getting Amazon out of Whole Foods. And even
worse, the combination of broadband companies getting control and ownership of
content, to the extent that they are no longer dumb pipes, but they become
interested in using content to extract top dollar in every scenario, with
consumer unfriendly practices like bundling and walled gardens.

The fact that we can't have decent broadband at good prices in the US is, to
me, a much bigger problem than Google owning Waze. Or Facebook owning WhatsApp
-- which actually seems like a good thing, since it being in house could get
Facebook on a faster path to good encryption, assuming their professed
interest in that is sincere.

If you want to regulate Google, regulate their privacy practices. If you want
to regulate Facebook, regulate the way they enable hidden players to influence
elections. If you want to regulate Amazon, well, just keep them out of the
broadband business because owning both the pipes and the content is bad for
consumers.

So tired of having clueless candidates.

~~~
slowmovintarget
I don't think she's clueless, because you can't take what she's claiming at
face value. She's saying what's fashionable with the Democrat voting base.
Anti-business has long been part of the platform.

~~~
natch
That’s a cheap political shot and even if it were true (democrats are actually
pro business, they’re just pro sustainable business) then the whole point you
are missing is that the choice of which businesses to target could be better
imho.

------
cmauniada
At this point, it looks like they are going to say anything that appeases even
the slightest subset of voters. It's sad really.

------
blackflame7000
There’s nothing inherently wrong with big companies. The problem occurs when
those companies begin to lobby for exemptions and loopholes that minimize
competition at the expense of the general public.

------
DoofusOfDeath
I have a dark fantasy in which politicians need to post collateral for their
campaign promises.

For example, "I'll break up Google while in office, or else I'll have my right
arm amputated."

In that fantasy, politicians would think much more carefully before knowingly
making hollow promises.

~~~
nilskidoo
If nothing else, I see that as the future of game shows- win the Hawaiian
vacation or lose your house. Not to self-promote, but I suspect you might
lovelovelove some of my points here, because I explored comparable logic:

[https://nilskidoo.blackblogs.org/monkey-wrenching-the-
americ...](https://nilskidoo.blackblogs.org/monkey-wrenching-the-americanaut/)

------
ronnier
By breaking the up the US tech giants, don’t we just get stronger tech giants
from Asia? So in the global sense, we’d just have even bigger giants.

~~~
slowmovintarget
Yes, it would be cutting off our nose to spite our face.

------
mc32
While I agree with her that some giants have too much power over users and may
deserve some regulation or provide access to competitors and while she may
find sympathetic ears in some of employees, I’m afraid this is a bit quixotic
against management of said behemoths.

~~~
guitarbill
Since - in a fair system - they also only get one vote, it should work out. Of
course, we know that with unlimited political spending, the system is not
fair.

------
AbrahamParangi
This is interesting because it's a classical liberal proposal, but I'm not
sure who's really in favor of it.

There's the traditional anti-monopolistic liberal argument for it, but then
there's also an anti-elite populist argument that I think has greater strength
on the right than the left.

I suspect that many of the people who believe this is a good idea would
basically never vote for Elizabeth Warren.

~~~
downandout
This proposal is strategic. We are currently in the run up to the primaries.
In the general election, she would lose if she stuck to such a platform. But
in the primaries, she is only competing for Democratic votes. With the rise of
AOC and others like her, the evidence shows that anti-capitalist ideas are
playing well among Democrats.

So the Democratic primaries in today’s environment are a race to the far edges
of the left, and this seems like a reasonable strategy to win that race. She
would have to use a different strategy in the general election, and my guess
is she will quietly abandon this platform if she wins the nomination.

------
i_am_proteus
There's something decidedly unsavory about a politician promising to break up
media companies. Some of the companies she's threatening play a huge role in
the modern election cycle.

------
nickpeterson
That seems like a really big target to paint on your back this far out...

~~~
FactolSarin
True, but considering how crowded the Democratic presidential field has become
staking out some high-profile positions might be a good idea.

------
a-saleh
Was there ever anything similar done? Only thing I recall was the weird AT&T
split [1]

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System)

~~~
rudiv
Standard Oil is probably the classic example, and also somewhat similar in
terms of a monopoly position having coercive effects on markets (although in
this case it's oligopolies rather than a monopoly). Anyway, that one comes to
mind, but I am fairly.confident that if you look it up, you will find a good
deal of examples of antitrust and antimonopoly laws being applied.

------
spenczar5
Does the presidency have a legal instrument to actually accomplish this?

~~~
tedivm
Absolutely- antitrust actions have split up large companies before. If Warren
appoints people to the DoJ who want to do this then it can happen.

For some historical precedent check out the Bell System breakup-

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System)

