Thread by @ArmineYalnizyan

An economist tackles the notion that competition law is about protecting consumers.
Notes economics views competition as being predominantly about "efficiency".
"You can't talk about competition without talking about power and dominance"
Keep your eyes on @RobinShaban, people.

https://twitter.com/metaviews/status/1347920866164809730

You *live* this, but not often taught.

Pricing strategies among a small number of players in a market often devolve into collusion. (Think telcomm; grocery stores and bread prices; oil)
Not just abt consumer choice, but standards and scrutiny for incumbents and *new* entrants.

Market structure and market share is part of competition-restricting practices, but proving *illegality* requires proving a merger/accelerating market share leads to price increases or undermines innovation. Hard to show evidence, as allegation is the this is *going* to happen.

So rather than preventing the problem, have to punish it IF you can prove it happened.
Yet another public health lesson [for me - an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, but we are so bad at preventing things].

Nice point about definition of "competitive economy" and how Canadian law undermines goal of price competition (rivalry for market share) in order to get more economies of scale. If biz can show merger lowers per unit costs (layoffs!) 👍🏽, irrespective of what happens to prices.

Another great point: monopoly/competition mean different things in health care. Is competition a value we want governing every aspect of our lives?
The professions have been good at convincing us that monopoly protects us from, for ex., bad doctors (scope of practice arguments)

In the Canadian North it's complicated, but fundamentally the government can be the problem, often no competition, the feds and the provinces protect subsidized monopolies that are not highly regulated. Indigenous governments are in an increasingly difficult position with "govts"

Competition as a metaphor is running rampant [rise of neoliberals and bitcoin bros cited]; but is competition as a "state of nature" what we want?

[meta conversation!]

Everything a duality of "x vs something".
Property rights vs human rights example.

Shopify is on its way to become monopolistic, something "good for Canada" but is it something we can learn from, as per the #NotAmazon movement?

Consumers thinking about alternatives and what power we have - it's probably mobilizing around anti-trust action.

Competition as a natural fact of human society is really convenient for people who say "I won the competition, it's mine now". Everyday narrative: Every man for himself.
BUT
Cooperation is as much a natural facet of humanity, if anything is a hallmark of human society.

The idea of cooperation itself is in competition with the way we see our essential nature.
We've almost gone backwards, capitalism has made things *too* competitive, need more "common good" models for biz, politics, whatever.
What we're up against is "how are we gonna win"?

What makes grocery store collusion bad? That's cooperation.

[Great question]

Not cooperative because not for the greater good, not for the people you are transacting with. Dollar more important than the effect on people.

Metaview:
"Even when trying to go past competition there is a certain competition that one has to deal with: those who *demand* competition, who are not going to sit and negotiate with you on the terms you desire...which is the point of political economy..../2"@jessehirsh

"....Which is the point of political economy: That you acknowledge power and you acknowledge money, and the way in which that money and that power relate to each and change the dynamics in which the rules and the law take place." @jessehirsh

[Everyone on this conversation, which was triggered by @robinshaban's work on competition law and the economics of competition, is so insightful. These comments aren't all Robin's, but I don't know who all these people are, so untagged.]

Myth: Competition law is about access to marketplace, and lowering barrier to entry.
Even if critical about market economics, there remains an abiding romanticism around entrepreneurship (including coops, small biz). /2

It's great when someone feels sense of agency, can participate in the economy in a meaningful way, but has to be accessible.
And that may be the myth of digital tools - make us think you can start a biz, go online and make $. But maybe you're just making $ for Shopify or Amazon.

Is pandemic boosting monopoly, y/n? (Q from @VassB)
Argument from professional community: need stability, safety, this is justification for policing 'market share'. So pandemic has boosted that.

Competition can be great. Sports example.
Comes with set of rules; generally a benefit to play (Olympic spirit).

But if scale up, we don't have "olympic spirit" in the way the world runs politics and economics.

We need to make it less a fight to the death, winner take all. Need a different philosophy of competition. Need social safety net, make sure people can survive.
We are having this discussion as if there is no injustice in the world.

Pay attention to the rules; but also to how the rules have changed, cuz the people who "won" changed the rules so they could keep winning.
Look also how we could have *more* monopoly, where the levers are. Learning from evolving spaces, and work backwards re areas of opportunity.

If we had examples of good monopolies maybe we wouldn't have Big Tech. [Makes me think about Bell being a "public monopoly", i.e. UTILITY]

Need to actually read and think about and discuss the regulations (dry but critical to critical thinking - like a wonky book club).

Reminder that everything constantly is evolving, and there are many examples of competition effort that work well. But that may go further and may need to be clamped down, that's tough.
Dynamic/continuum between competition and cooperation.

Democracies succeed when you have healthy competition (differences of opinion, strategy, etc.) that permits everyone to come together to agree/cooperate from time to time.

Smaller jurisdictions easier to do both (Saskatchewan example).

Idea: @robinshaban should do a popup class on competition.
Value of salons as a knowledge mobilization vehicle and a way to get to know one another [these people are from literally all over Canada], learn, grow, become politically more active on issues we find important.

~FIN