Thesis: large tech companies are private property
Antithesis: any entity with billions of users and not much competition becomes quasi-public, needs antitrust
Synthesis: adversarial process repels future founders. Instead, could a state pay market price to acquire the company?
Antithesis: any entity with billions of users and not much competition becomes quasi-public, needs antitrust
Synthesis: adversarial process repels future founders. Instead, could a state pay market price to acquire the company?
The main issue with this line of thinking is that even if an antitrust case costs the state billions, buying Google would be a trillion dollars.
That’s larger than the 2008 bailout and ~30% of USG’s 2018 revenue.
Veiled force is still cheaper for the state than money.
That’s larger than the 2008 bailout and ~30% of USG’s 2018 revenue.
Veiled force is still cheaper for the state than money.
China does do something like this, though. Jack Ma of Alibaba and Pony Ma of Tencent are members of the Communist Party.
Their companies are both honored at official party galas (carrot) and are quasi-nationalized in many ways (stick).
Their companies are both honored at official party galas (carrot) and are quasi-nationalized in many ways (stick).
