If concentration is systemic, then taking on monopolists is an inflation-fighting strategy. 60% of inflation increases are going to corporate profits. mattstoller.substack.com/p/corporate-pr…
Meat is an obvious case. Back in October I pointed out that the economists blocking action on meatpacking consolidation had manipulated data to protect monopolists. Higher beef prices are one result. mattstoller.substack.com/p/economists-t…
It's not just meat; concentration is systemic. 75% of industries are more concentrated than they were in the 1990s. This results in larger firms with higher margins, no operational improvements, and fewer entrants. econpapers.repec.org/article/ouprev…
Shortages are one result of concentration and monopolization. And the shortages aren't a result of the pandemic, they are a result of policy. mattstoller.substack.com/p/the-villains…
We pointed out that the Obama administration's antitrust policies, inspired and led by @ProfFionasm and @Sherman1890, were a total disaster. Including in meat-packing. Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, all had a similar pro-monopoly policy framework. economicliberties.us/our-work/coura…
Concentration probably sets us up for financial fragility and bouts of deflation/inflation. The case for decentralization of the economy is strong. Hyman Minsky in Stabilizing an Unstable Economy noted that larger firms create financial fragility. mattstoller.substack.com/p/how-monopoli…
Dominant financial power was the cause of the financial/foreclosure crisis, and the erosion of democracy in America. Obama helped the banks, meat-packers, big tech, hospitals et al facilitate authoritarianism in commerce. ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol39/iss4…
One reason for zero percent interest rates since the crisis is there's been nowhere to invest except speculation, government debt, and monopolies. The rest is 'kill zones.' There's no resiliency in our economy because all we have is PE and dominant firms. mattstoller.substack.com/p/how-monopoli…
In February of 2020 I pointed out that this toxic brew of economic policymaking would lead to shortages. And so it has. wired.com/story/covid-19…
But supply chain fragility was easily foreseeable, and foreseen. I wrote up the problem in 2010. thenation.com/article/archiv…
The anti-monopoly movement got a big boost in 2016 when @ddayen wrote this piece, which got Elizabeth Warren's attention. Since then the narrative has been adopted on the right and left and in industry. newrepublic.com/article/131412…
It's terrific that the Biden administration has adopted this framework and appointed good enforcers. But they have to follow through. In some areas they are. Here's Rohit Chopra pushing to block bank mergers. nytimes.com/2021/12/31/bus…
In other areas, Biden has failed. Four months ago we wrote to them asking to remove the official at the FDA who has been helping a testing duopoly by blocking the approval of more rapid Covid tests. They refused. The testing fiasco has been the result. documentcloud.org/documents/2109…
The White House is not coherent on taking on corporate power. Right now CMS and the FDA are in a big fight over a particularly expensive Alzheimer drug that doesn't work, but whose inclusion into Medicare could cause premium spikes of 14.5%. cnn.com/2021/11/12/hea…
The incoherence is hindering Biden's ability to govern. Here's Pete Buttigieg asking big telecom to delay their 5G roll-out for two weeks for air safety purposes. AT&T, Verizon, et al mock him for it with a resounding NO. cnet.com/tech/services-…
All of which says the Biden administration's record is mixed. Even on this meatpacking announcement, which is good, the official in charge at the USDA is Tom Vilsack, who under Obama helped consolidate the industry. washingtonmonthly.com/2020/12/13/sho…
There are a few things in this announcement that are immediately useful, but a lot of it is longer-term funding projects. And then there are pending investigations, which could be meaningful. So this is a 'maybe it will work' announcement.
In other words, the Biden must actually settle his White House's internal differences and follow through on taking on corporate power. Otherwise, the administration will continue to seem incoherent, inflation will rage, and people will feel there's no one in charge.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I think my response to @JosephPolitano is that his analysis is divorced from the underlying reality of commerce. Like most macro-economists, he assumes that individual markets are generally competitive, and that concentration is not the norm.
Take this argument on how meatpacking monopolists don't really matter because meat is a small portion of the CPI. This only makes sense if you assume that meatpacking is an outlier. But is it? No.
Rather amusing to see a debate over price controls as if we have a functional government who could implement them in time to do anything about inflation. Adorable!
People who cite John Kenneth Galbraith as controlling inflation often neglect to point out that there was a large competent bureaucracy and public support to implement them. What are we gonna do today? Hire McKinsey?
The anti-monopoly movement spent years studying how to organize the bureaucracies and it’s still really hard to turn the ship around. The idea you can snap your fingers and return to a WWII model of economic organization should be embarrassing to its proponents.
I’ve lost huge amounts of respect for academic historians over the last fifteen years, with superficial and cringe essays like this. Elite historians are increasingly just MSNBC pundits with phd’s. politico.com/news/magazine/…
I remember under Obama how ‘top’ historians just loved him, and ignored his policy choices. Under Trump they mostly followed the same obnoxious groupthink.
Like all progressive institutions, the university system is in crisis. And academics should expect political attacks because they are upholding an increasingly illegitimate order.
I love writing my newsletter, but I always get nervous before hitting send. This year BIG hit 50,000 subscribers, and that's a lot of people if I get something wrong.
Inspired by Larry Summers and his tirade against antitrust, I looked into inflation and market power. It turns out 60% of the rise in inflation is going to corporate profits. mattstoller.substack.com/p/corporate-pr…
This is the corporate profit increase from 2019 to 2021, from $1T to $1.7T, or $2,126 per American. Yes, you pay more than two thousand dollars a year more for everything than you did before the pandemic, purely because corporate profits have gone up that much.
"For every American man, woman and child in the U.S., corporate America used to make about $3,081 in 2019, and today corporate America makes about $5,207 in 2021. That’s an increase of $2,126 per person." mattstoller.substack.com/p/corporate-pr…
There's an enterprising career waiting for a business historian willing to debunk Hovenkamp's problematic historical work. He's just wrong that 19th century anti-monopoly policy was merely about gov't privilege. Ultra vires suits were the keystone.
Hovenkamp is a deeply influential pro-monopoly advocate, a sort of Diet Bork who spread a more annoying and difficult to administer version of Chicago School philosophy throughout the courts.
Here's our piece on Hovenkamp's disastrous philosophy and legacy.