1. Get ready for a nitty gritty thread on how corporate power is reliant on the Federal Trade Commission, and insider Republicans and Democrats, for its power. As well as some thoughts on why this will change. It starts with a giant little noticed merger this week.
2. This week, the FTC approved the merger of Praxair, Inc. and Linde AG, the second and third largest suppliers of industrial gases in the world. Industrial gases are a key input for industries such as oil and gas, aerospace, steel making, health care, food manufacturing, etc.
3. The consequences of this transaction are unpredictable and potentially dangerous. It will probably raise prices across the economy, and concentrate supply chains in chaotic ways. It's a giant combination of corporate assets. But that's not what makes it interesting...
4. It's a test case of the willpower of the FTC. Linde is German. And bc of German law, the merger had a firm deadline of Wed. Had the FTC challenged the merger, it couldn't have been completed. In other words, the FTC could have blocked the merger *without needing to litigate.*
5. The FTC likes to claim they are limited by funding and courts. Don't blame us for rising corporate concentration, they say. But what this case reveals is that the enforcers themselves, the staff, and 4 commissioners at the FTC, have an ideological preference for concentration.
6. The decision was 4-1. @chopraftc, once again, was the only commissioner to dissent. You can read his dissent here: ftc.gov/system/files/d…
7. Back in August, I did a thread on the FTC's refusal to penalize corporate wrongdoers, or stand up against wage fixing. I mentioned a 4-1 decision. That thread is here:
8. There have been several more 4-1 decisions. In one, @JoeSimonsFTC, @FTCPhillips, and @MOhlhausenFTC - all Republicans - voted to essentially let off without penalty companies that lied about goods made in China but labeled with Made in USA. Then there's Linde-Praxair.
9. The FTC staffer who ran the review on Linde-Praxair is Michael Moiseyev. Moiseyev oversees pharmaceutical and tech mergers. He's highly capable but ideologically unconcerned about concentration, which is why there are merger sprees in both areas.
10. The FTC is holding a series of hearings, a sort of self-reflection, on their performance. The hearings have turned out to be largely self-congratulatory and silly so far. Meanwhile data breaches at Google and Facebook are happening, and the commission clears this merger.
11. I was initially excited about the new slate of FTC commissioners. Republican @JoeSimonsFTC and @FTCPhillips made noises about being tough-minded on enforcement. So did the Dems, like @chopraftc and Schumer pick @RKSlaughterFTC. But so far...
12. Only @chopraftc has evinced any interest in breaking with the failed status quo. We can see now that the FTC, at every level, has largely adhered to an agenda that has failed. New leadership hasn't reshaped the agenda. There is now a legitimacy crisis for them.
13. One of the key questions is how to essentially deal with an institution like the FTC that doesn't adhere to its mandate of policing markets. Should it be restructured? Reformed? Eliminated? I don't know. One obvious solution is to start sending Federal $$$ to state enforcers.
14. I no longer assume the FTC operates to police markets. Given the chance to block the harmful merger Linde-Praxair merger, they just.. didn't. So to deal w/the problem of monopoly, I think we'll have to go through Congress and the states. Not the FTC. Happy to be proved wrong.
15. (And yes, there are details, and there is an alternative story about why the merger will increase competition, but it's self-evidently stupid. Giant companies don't merge to increase competition.)
16. I'll also note that three Republican FTC Commissioners chose to allow companies lying about Made in USA when importing goods from China to get off without paying anything.
17. We need our markets policed to ensure they are open, there is competition, no fraud, etc. How do we make that happen? Unclear now. @GaneshSitaraman proposes a new anti-monopoly agency. But the conversation is starting. greatdemocracyinitiative.org/wp-content/upl…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Matt Stoller

Matt Stoller Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @matthewstoller

Feb 14
1. This is an interesting piece by pollster Stan Greenberg, who coined the term 'Reagan Democrat' in the 1980s. It's all about Obama and his legacy, and not in a positive sense. Dems are losing black and hispanic working class voters now. prospect.org/politics/democ…
2. Greenberg sees the same trend lines for black and Hispanic working class voters as he did for white working class voters in the 1980s. And this all happened under Obama, who voters see as prioritizing Wall Street and big business.
3. While he's respected, Obama was insanely out of touch on what mattered to voters, and won reelection only because Mitt Romney was more out of touch. Obama is liked but the Obama political project is perceived of as disastrous. Obama is why Hillary Clinton lost in 2016.
Read 10 tweets
Feb 13
Anyone who thinks the U.S. should defend Ukraine needs to explain why letting China waltz into Taiwan as our forces are bogged down in Europe is a good idea.
If Putin wants to invade Ukraine, there's nothing we can or should do. There is no rules-based international order, we saw to that with the invasion of Iraq. And Putin's fear of NATO expansion is legitimate. There is simply no reason to be involved in the defense of Ukraine.
Taiwan is actually strategically vital to the U.S., Ukraine is mostly not. This isn't complex, but the Army is embarrassed about Afghanistan and they have no role in the Pacific. And our bureaucracies know how to hate Russia but don't want to deal with the Wall Street-China axis.
Read 4 tweets
Feb 13
The answer is no, economists are not curious about why profits are radically higher.
It's common to ask 'well weren't firms greedy in 2019?!?'

Well, there has been a record merger wave from 2019-2021, accelerated by the pandemic and the Federal Reserve.

So yes, market power has increased.
No one is saying there's more greed, or that market power is the only cause of inflation. These are straw-men designed to police the boundaries of elite discourse. Keep doing it, economists, keep discrediting yourselves.
Read 4 tweets
Feb 11
Listening now, man the judge is angry at Facebook. Asks plaintiffs to call for sanctioning them over their bad behavior in discovery. Also calls for the lawyers to also be sanctioned. Wow.
Judge Chhabria: "I want to invite the plaintiffs to invite to file motions for sanctions if they agree with me, and in any other areas where Facebook has engaged in sanctionable conduct. The partners in the pleading and Facebook should be jointly liable in the sanctions."
Judge Chhabria is saying the associates perhaps should not be sanctioned, but the partners should be. Perhaps to pay attorney costs for the other side. He's holding #BigLaw accountable.
Read 7 tweets
Feb 7
1. Ok, this is kind of interesting. NBER's industrial organization section, which is the gathering of economists who study antitrust, just did something that seems a bit odd with regards to its annual conference. nber.org/conferences/in…
2. On day one of their conference, Friday, there was a panel with a bunch of antitrust economists who very much dislike Lina Khan and the new anti-monopoly movement. It was a lively panel, and I watched it. Image
3. Economist @florianederer live-tweeted the panel, and it kicked up something of a storm among those of us who care about the politics of antitrust economics. You can read his thread here.
Read 16 tweets
Feb 7
I am no MMTer but I'm struck by how the basic critique by @Noahpinion of MMT - 'they always claim they are right' - apply to failed mainstream models of economics. None of them got the financial crisis or free trade or shortages.

It's all garbage. All of it.
Price controls are a good idea sometimes and a bad one sometimes. We are imposing controls for shipping right now, which no one in this debate seems to understand. We cannot impose broad price controls because we lack the capacity, which no one in this debate seems to understand.
The point of economics is not to be right or wrong, that's entirely incidental. The point is to develop a political language that excludes normal people from discussing political economy. That is it. mattstoller.substack.com/p/what-is-the-…
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(