US tech giants accused of 'monopoly power'

The recommendations come after a 16-month congressional investigation into Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple.

"These companies have too much power and that power must be reined in," wrote the Democratic lawmakers involved in the investigation.

But Republicans involved in the investigation disagreed.

In a statement, one Republican lawmaker, Jim Jordan, dismissed the report as "partisan," saying it advances "radical proposals that would remake antitrust law with a far-left vision."

He also supports many of the report's conclusions about the companies' anticompetitive tactics, but says the Democrats' proposed remedies go too far.

"Antitrust enforcement in the Big Tech marketplace is not a partisan issue," said Republican Ken Buck. "But an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and I favor targeted antitrust enforcement over burdensome regulations that stifle innovation in our industry.

Monopoly power?

US tech companies have come under increasing scrutiny in Washington in recent years over their size and power. The House Judiciary Committee investigation is just one of several facing companies including Facebook and Apple.

A 449-page report written by committee staff accused the companies of charging high fees, forcing unfavorable contracts on smaller customers and engaging in "killer acquisitions" that undermine rivals.

"Simply put, what were once weak upstarts challenging the status quo have become monopolies like those seen in the days of oil barons and railroad barons.

The findings should prompt policymakers to consider a series of reforms, including stronger enforcement of existing competition laws and changes to limit the sectors in which companies can do business and prevent companies from operating as players in sectors where they are the dominant provider of infrastructure, as Amazon does when it acts as both a seller and a marketplace for other merchants.

This report is a blockbuster.

It's a stack of evidence collected over 16 months.

But the key here is that these are Democratic proposals.

They're not bipartisan recommendations.

In fact, from what we're already hearing from Republicans, many of the recommendations are "not recommended" by conservatives.

And some Republicans were outraged by the report's omissions.

The Republican Party hoped for a section on suspicion of ant i-conservatism, but seems to have been blocked by the Democratic Party.

However, some Republicives want to find common points about the ant i-trade method.

For example, the Republican Party Ken Bag has indicated some recommendations. For example, a change in the opposition of ant i-competitive proof, that is, the acquisition of a competitor is more difficult.

However, in fact, specific legislative proposals are unlikely to appear until the election is over.

What is now clear, however, is that Biden and Trump are taking the essential challenges of Big Tech's power in different ways.

According to testimony at the committee in July, the boss of Tech companies defended their actions.

'Fringe notions'

On Tuesday, Amazon counterattacks as a fringe concept of "ant i-trade method" known as a competitive law in the United States.

"The opportunity for thir d-party to sell alongside retailers' products is a competition that gives consumers most, and we have made a market play model so successful for thir d-party sellers," he said. I mentioned.

"The Democratic and Democratic divisions in Washington in Washington have reduced important actions for companies," said Wedbush Securities analyst, Dan Ives.

"The disagreement of the consensus of the pros and cons of the ant i-trading method is still a major problem in moving things forward.

Although it may change if the Democratic Party will grow in the next US presidential election, he says, "Despite the content of the report and the recommendation of the Big Tech Player (M & Amp; A and Business Company, etc.). Without the core law, we believe that the momentum of the antitrust law will hit the brick wall. "

Facebook, on the other hand, states in a statement: "Instagram and WhatsApp have reached new successes because Facebook invested billions of dollars in these businesses.

"At the time of the acquisition of the two companies, there was a strong competitive environment. The regulatory authorities considered each transaction thoroughly, and of course we decided that there was no reason to stop it."

Facebook had an "monopoly power" in the social networking market, maintaining a threat of emerging by "acquiring, copying, and killing" using data advantage.

What did the report say?

• Google monopolized online search and advertising using a series of "ant i-competitive tactics", including preferting its content than other websites.
• Amazon has "important and permanent market dominance" in online shopping, which is "ant i-competitive actor in the treatment of thir d-party sellers in a closed room. Was further enhanced.
• Apple exercised exclusive power through the App Store and used it to "create, strengthen, discriminate, and eliminate rivals, and provide their products with priority."
• 15 SEP 2024 19:52 IST update date: 15 SEP 2024 19:57 IST

Amazon, Flipkart Face Antitrust Heat? Small Businesses Feel the Pinch

E-commerce giants Amazon and Flipkart face antitrust scrutiny in India for allegedly harming smaller retailers and startups through anti-competitive practices. Union Minister Piyush Goyal calls for a balanced approach to e-commerce growth.

Amazon and Flipkart face the violation of antitrust law?

A month ago, Minister of Commerce and Industry Pyoush Goyal gave a strict speech for major e-commerce companies and concerned about their ant i-competitive and looting pricing practices. Goyal now seems to have known the results of the antitrust law on Amazon and flip carts. The Indian Competition Committee (CCI) has violated local competitive law through the acts such as giving priority to specific sellers, prioritizing specific products, and providing significant discounts. I'm blamed. It is said that these acts have damaged small retailers and emerging companies and are reconstructed the E-commerce status in India.

With the season of the Indian festival, an e-commerce giant and his partner companies are preparing for the biggest sale, and the exclusive law report has hit them. According to media reports, the Indian Competition Committee (CCI) contains Amazon and flip carts, prioritizing specific exhibitors, prioritizing specific exhibitions, enabling significant discounts, and damages small retailers. He revealed that it could be given. The main survey results are as follows:

Antitrust Violations by E-commerce Giants

Priority exhibitor: Amazon preferred six major selling sellers, and flip carts gave a similar profit to 33 sellers and provided benefits that violate the antitrust law. These sellers received marketing, warehouse management, and other essential services with a large subsidy. The CCI pointed out that the two companies made these discounts using foreign capital.

1. Special listing: According to CCI surveys, Amazon and FLIPKART's search results monopolized the products of these selected sellers and were a major obstacle for other sellers. < SPAN> Amazon has "important and permanent market dominance" in online shopping, which is "ant i-parties in the company's" i n-house competitors "in a closed room. It was further enhanced by "competitive acts".
2. Apple exercised exclusive power through the App Store and used it to "create, strengthen, discriminate, and eliminate rivals, and provide their products with priority."
3. 15 SEP 2024 19:52 IST update date: 15 SEP 2024 19:57 IST
4. Amazon and Flipkart face the violation of antitrust law?

Goyal's Concerns and a Call for Citizen-Centric E-Commerce

A month ago, Minister of Commerce and Industry Pyoush Goyal gave a strict speech for major e-commerce companies and concerned about their ant i-competitive and looting pricing practices. Goyal now seems to have known the results of the antitrust law on Amazon and flip carts. The Indian Competition Committee (CCI) has violated local competitive law through the acts such as giving priority to specific sellers, prioritizing specific products, and providing significant discounts. I'm blamed. It is said that these acts have damaged small retailers and emerging companies and are reconstructed the E-commerce status in India.

With the season of the Indian festival, an e-commerce giant and his partner companies are preparing for the biggest sale, and the exclusive law report has hit them. According to media reports, the Indian Competition Committee (CCI) contains Amazon and flip carts, prioritizing specific exhibitors, prioritizing specific exhibitions, enabling significant discounts, and damages small retailers. He revealed that it could be given. The main survey results are as follows:

• Priority exhibitor: Amazon preferred six major selling sellers, and flip carts gave a similar profit to 33 sellers and provided benefits that violate the antitrust law. These sellers received marketing, warehouse management, and other essential services with a large subsidy. The CCI pointed out that the two companies made these discounts using foreign capital.
• Special listing: According to CCI surveys, Amazon and FLIPKART's search results monopolized the products of these selected sellers and were a major obstacle for other sellers. Amazon has "important and permanent market dominance" in online shopping, which is "ant i-competitive actor in the treatment of thir d-party sellers in a closed room. Was further enhanced.
• Apple exercised exclusive power through the App Store and used it to "create, strengthen, discriminate, and eliminate rivals, and provide their products with priority."
• 15 SEP 2024 19:52 IST update date: 15 SEP 2024 19:57 IST

Impact on Indian Startups and Small Entrepreneurs

Amazon and Flipkart face the violation of antitrust law?

• A month ago, Minister of Commerce and Industry Pyoush Goyal gave a strict speech for major e-commerce companies and concerned about their ant i-competitive and looting pricing practices. Goyal now seems to have known the results of the antitrust law on Amazon and flip carts. The Indian Competition Committee (CCI) has violated local competitive law through the acts such as giving priority to specific sellers, prioritizing specific products, and providing significant discounts. I'm blamed. It is said that these acts have damaged small retailers and emerging companies and are reconstructed the E-commerce status in India.
• With the season of the Indian festival, an e-commerce giant and his partner companies are preparing for the biggest sale, and the exclusive law report has hit them. According to media reports, the Indian Competition Committee (CCI) contains Amazon and flip carts, prioritizing specific exhibitors, prioritizing specific exhibitions, enabling significant discounts, and damages small retailers. He revealed that it could be given. The main survey results are as follows:
• Priority exhibitor: Amazon preferred six major selling sellers, and flip carts gave a similar profit to 33 sellers and provided benefits that violate the antitrust law. These sellers received marketing, warehouse management, and other essential services with a large subsidy. The CCI pointed out that the two companies made these discounts using foreign capital.
• Special listing: According to CCI surveys, Amazon and FLIPKART's search results monopolized the products of these selected sellers and were a major obstacle for other sellers.
• Exclusive product release: Both platforms have signed a new terminal with an exclusive contract with smartphones and hig h-tech companies, which has a significant impact on small retailers. According to CCI reports, such exclusive launches were disadvantaged by online sellers, and retailers in real stores were struggling, and in many cases, receiving terminals was significantly delayed.

Potential Consequences for Startups and Small Entrepreneurs

Significant discount: Amazon and flip carts allowed priority sellers to significantly discounts, and sometimes sold products at a price below the cost. According to the CCI, the strategy aimed at reducing competitiveness and leaving SMEs out of the market.

• Amazon and flip carts have not yet responded to the CCI survey, but the Federal Minister of Pyche Goyal expressed concerns about the compulsory pricing of these electronic business companies and protect traditional retailers. He appeals for the necessity. He proposes a wel l-balanced approach that protects SMEs and promotes the growth of e-commerce.
• Goyal's main points are as follows:
• Balance of growth: The government needs to balance the promotion of e-commerce and the traditional support for the traditional retail business.

The Future of E-Commerce in India

Learning from Europe and the United States: Goyal emphasized learning from Western countries, whose E-commerce growth has contributed to the decline of real stores.

He called for a decision that was backed by data to evaluate the impact of the dat a-led policy E-commerce on Indian business.

If Big Tech Is a Problem, What’s the Solution?

The answer will have major implications for US and global markets.

• Approach Goyal, a citize n-centered, emphasized that e-commerce should be profitable not only in large companies but also for all sources of society.
• The violation of antitrust laws by Amazon and flip carts can have a serious impact on Indian emerging companies and small entrepreneurs:
• Unauthorized competition: preferential treatment and significant discounts create an unfair competition environment for small and mediu m-sized enterprises, making prices and competitive competition difficult.

Market access restrictions: Exclusive sales and priority exhibitions will limit the market access of small sellers and hinder the possibility of growth.

Profitable issues: The pressure of having to compete with a large discount reduces the profit margin of small and mediu m-sized enterprises, making business continuation difficult.

Innovation inhibition: Competitive markets promote innovation. The rule of major e-commerce companies can inhibit innovation and reduce opportunities for emerging companies.

Depending on the platform: Many small and mediu m-sized enterprises greatly depend on the e-commerce platform. Ant i-competitive practices can deepen this dependence and make independent management difficult.

Such unfair practices can lead to serious results for Indian companies and small entrepreneurs:

Discontinuation: SMEs who cannot compete with the major e-commerce platforms and market dominance may be forced to go out of business.

Loss of employment: Business closure can lead to a wide range of employment loss and can affect the whole country's life.

Slowing economic growth: Emerging companies and small and mediu m-sized enterprises are indispensable for promoting economic growth. Ant i-competitive practices can delay the development of this important sector.

Political support for antitrust

The Indian electronic commerce is expected to grow rapidly and to reach 7, 590 billion in Indianlpy in 2029 in 2024 to 2029. The driving force of this growth is the spread of smartphones, increasing income, and improving digital infrastructure. In particular, the number of digital payments using UPI is currently being used by more than 800 million people, and the transaction amount in FY2023-24 has reached $ 131. 16 trillion.

However, in order to secure fair competition and protect small and mediu m-sized enterprises, the government must take ant i-competitive practice. The balanced, citize n-centered regulation framework is indispensable in maximizing the possibility of electronic commercial transactions that promote economic growth and social interests. By promoting innovation, giving power to emerging companies, and protecting traditional retailers, the actions taken today form the future of the Indian digital market, which is comprehensive and fair for everyone. You will guarantee that it will continue.

Francine scene McKenna

A resurgence of antitrust

August 07, 2023

CB R-Public policy

In 2020, the New York Times Cashmir Hill reporter Kashmir Hill, who went to the news site last year for the News site, Facebook, Google, Apple, and Microsoft, how difficult it would be. I wrote about the experiment to check. As part of this, Hill hires an expert, and her mobile phones, laptops, and other devices are designed to block data from millions of internet addresses managed by hig h-tech huge companies. did.

It turned out that the connection with a major technology was closer to the zip tie. Eliminating the relationship with Amazon was a serious challenge, because many other companies have used the Amazon Web Service, the largest cloud provider on the Internet, for their own sites. She lost not only Amazon Prime Video, but also access to competing Netflix on AWS. Many companies also use ful l-fillment by Amazon.

When she blocked Google, the web browsing was delayed because of everything that Google provided to many sites, such as fonts, advertisements, and trackers. Ironically, when I block Google, the Hills in the same week when Hill posted the Times paper article, the U. S. Shimomitsu Ant i-House Ant i-Trust Committee's Amazon Jeff Bezos, Apple's Tim Cook, Facebook Mark. You will not be able to see the ultr a-pulsed burns against Zuckerberg and Google Sundal Pichai. C-SPAN distributed public hearings through Youtube owned by Google.

We are now in a true big business era, not just big business. Big Tech monopolizes the headline, but many other industries have a huge player. The fact that a small number of true large companies has advanced to a wide range, both John D. Rockefeller and his friends have dominated almost all of the US oil production, processing, sales, and transportation through standard oil. Some people may be reminiscent of the times, the era of American cigarettes, and the era of the whole tobacco industry in the United States. The Shaman's monopoly was enacted in 1890, but in 1911, the Supreme Court ordered both Standard Oil and American tobacco to dissolve as a result of violations of the law.

The Chicago school and consumer welfare

SPENCER YONGWOOK KWON, Chicago Booth, Kaspar Zimmermann, who is enrolled in a doctoral course at Harvard University, and Kaspar Zimmermann of the Leibnitz Financial Institute, an ant i-Trust method and an ant i-Trust method. A new scrutiny cycle by regulatory authorities has occurred. The profit scale from 1918 to 1975, the sales scale from 1959 to today, the scale of the assets from 1931 to today.

What to do about this situation is up for debate. One option is to break up some of the big companies and reorganize the relevant markets to give more space to competitors, as was done with Standard Oil and American Tobacco. But forced breakups of big companies are controversial and rare. The second approach is to check the power and further growth of big companies through aggressive regulation, litigation, and legislation.

But some argue that being big is not necessarily a sign of a problem, and that if giant companies have too much political and social power, antitrust law is not the mechanism to deal with it. If the presence of a few large companies is not economically harmful in many markets, this suggests that changes to the antitrust enforcement regime should be incremental and implemented carefully.

The outcome of this debate will have a significant impact on U. S. and global markets. Whichever path policymakers choose, it will affect how easily new entrants can challenge incumbents, how easily companies can grow, whether corporate executives have incentives to innovate, and ultimately, how the companies that many of us interact with multiple times a day behave.

Concerns about monopoly power have waxed and waned over time, both among policymakers and the public. At times, the decades-long trend of corporate consolidation was celebrated. But concerns about market power have remained even when it was politically unpalatable.

Antitrust enforcement and market power are popular topics in the media and in Washington, and trust destruction seems to be one of the few issues on which Democrats and Republicans agree, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO). In February, Buck and Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI, who has since left Congress) founded the Congressional Antitrust Caucus, whose raison d'être is Big Tech.

The interventional approach to secure the competitive market has become noticeable in the executive government. Former President Donald Trump signed a bipartinese competitive medical insurance reform law in 2020 and stepped into the area of ​​antitrust law. The law has eliminated the application of the Federal Ant i-Trust Law to the health insurance industry since 1945.

In recent years, US policy creators, judges, and regulatory authorities have been active in ant i-competitive actions and merger claims and pursuing.

Proceeding the scrolling timeline

Under Joe Biden, the successor to President Trump, the ant i-Trust authorities continue to be remarkably aggressive to oppose the merger and accuse companies that exercise monopoly power. Their success in court varies. In 2022, the Ministry of Justice was disadvantaged by Sugar, Defens e-related companies, Boz Allen, and United Health Group, and in February 2023 the Federal Trade Commission was face. It was not possible to prevent the acquisition of VR company wit h-in by Meta, the parent company of the book. The Ministry of Justice has also lost a series of cases in which the employer has complained that the employer has colluded to fix wages.

However, in 2022, the court acknowledged Martin Sucrelelli, a former representative of Turing Pharmaceuticals, to paid $ 64 million, acknowledged the personal responsibilities of implementing an illegal plan to monopolize the life drug dalaprim market. I gave my permanent expulsion. In October of the same year, the President of the Asphalt Company based in Bings, Montana, was convicted that he had tried to monopolize the local market for crack ceiling services on the highway, and the Ministry of Justice violated the Exclusive Law for the first time in 40 years. Won the criminal case. On the same day, the Federal Judge stopped the merger of book publisher Penguin Random House and Simon & Suster by $ 2 billion. Two weeks later, after the ticket master system crashed during the Taylor Swift concert tour pr e-sale, the New York Times is subject to ant i-trade law survey by live Nation Entertainment owning Ticket Master. He reported that it has become.

Even from overseas, even major hig h-tech companies are receiving regulations. In May, Meta agreed to sell GIF search engines to sell Gifi, a stock image service shutter stock, for $ 53 million (more than $ 260 million than the company paid in 2020).

In the merger of hig h-tech companies, regulatory authorities respond. Microsoft's acquiring $ 69 billion of the Game Company Activition Blizzard, which was announced in January 2022, was blocked by CMA in April this year and was approved by the European Commission a few weeks later. After the FTC failed to persuade the federal judge and postpone the merger, CMA said that if the two companies proposed a reorganization plan, they would consider reorganization.

The approval rating for the enforcement of the ant i-trading law fluctuates with the times has the fundamental problem of what the ant i-trade method is to achieve. The common legal standard for evaluating monopoly in the United States is the consumer welfare standard, and is noticeable (or lack of its own) prices, quality, technological innovation, and production. However, consumer welfare is a major standard for interpretation. Jonathan Cantant, who leads the Judge's ant i-trade department, calls consumer welfare a "catchphrase,". This is because "If you ask five ant i-trade experts about the meaning of the consumer welfare standard, six different answers are often returned."

The purpose of consumer welfare as the antitrust law is the late Robert Bokek, a lawyer who claimed that the Shaman Law, which aimed to establish a free and competitive market in the 1970s, was a "prescription for consumer welfare." It is well tied.

Break them up

Bokke argued that antitrust law should set the purpose defined in economic terms based on the economic principle, especially to maximize efficiency. Boke is an economist and law scholar called Chicago (because it includes scholars related to the University of Chicago, such as the late Nobel Prize winner, the late Milton Friedman, the late George Stagla, and Richard Pozner at the University of Chicago). The group supported this view. By limiting the scope of the ant i-trade method, the Chicago School has contributed to the enrollment of the ant i-Trust Law to a more reluctant attitude.

Some experts argue that dismantling Big Tech is more complicated than expected and not very useful.

The Chicago Studies were specific and narrow, focused on measurable results, contrasting many people in the mi d-20th century ant i-trade policy incoherence. < SPAN> The merger of hig h-tech companies varies from regulatory authorities. Microsoft's acquiring $ 69 billion of the Game Company Activition Blizzard, which was announced in January 2022, was blocked by CMA in April this year and was approved by the European Commission a few weeks later. After the FTC failed to persuade the federal judge and postpone the merger, CMA said that if the two companies proposed a reorganization plan, they would consider reorganization.

The approval rating for the enforcement of the ant i-trading law fluctuates with the times has the fundamental problem of what the ant i-trade method is to achieve. The common legal standard for evaluating monopoly in the United States is the consumer welfare standard, and is noticeable (or lack of its own) prices, quality, technological innovation, and production. However, consumer welfare is a major standard for interpretation. Jonathan Cantant, who leads the Judge's ant i-trade department, calls consumer welfare a "catchphrase,". This is because if you ask five ant i-trade experts about the meaning of consumer welfare standards, six different answers are often returned. "

The purpose of consumer welfare as the antitrust law is the late Robert Bokek, a lawyer who claimed that the Shaman Law, which aimed to establish a free and competitive market in the 1970s, was a "prescription for consumer welfare." It is well tied.

Big Tech, big deals

Bokke argued that antitrust law should set the purpose defined in economic terms based on the economic principle, especially to maximize efficiency. Boke is an economist and law scholar called Chicago (because it includes scholars related to the University of Chicago, such as the late Nobel Prize winner, the late Milton Friedman, the late George Stagla, and Richard Pozner at the University of Chicago). The group supported this view. By limiting the scope of the ant i-trade method, the Chicago School has contributed to the enrollment of the ant i-Trust Law to a more reluctant attitude.

Some experts argue that dismantling Big Tech is more complicated than expected and not very useful.

The Chicago Studies were specific and narrow, focused on measurable results, contrasting many people in the mi d-20th century ant i-trade policy incoherence. In the merger of hig h-tech companies, regulatory authorities respond. Microsoft's acquiring $ 69 billion of the Game Company Activition Blizzard, which was announced in January 2022, was blocked by CMA in April this year and was approved by the European Commission a few weeks later. After the FTC failed to persuade the federal judge and postpone the merger, CMA said that if the two companies proposed a reorganization plan, they would consider reorganization.

The approval rating for the enforcement of the ant i-trading law fluctuates with the times has the fundamental problem of what the ant i-trade method is to achieve. The common legal standard for evaluating monopoly in the United States is the consumer welfare standard, and is noticeable (or lack of its own) prices, quality, technological innovation, and production. However, consumer welfare is a major standard for interpretation. Jonathan Cantant, who leads the Judge's ant i-trade department, calls consumer welfare a "catchphrase,". This is because if you ask five ant i-trade experts about the meaning of consumer welfare standards, six different answers are often returned. "

The purpose of consumer welfare as the antitrust law is the late Robert Bokek, a lawyer who claimed that the Shaman Law, which aimed to establish a free and competitive market in the 1970s, was a "prescription for consumer welfare." It is well tied.

Bokke argued that antitrust law should set the purpose defined in economic terms based on the economic principle, especially to maximize efficiency. Boke is an economist and law scholar called Chicago (because it includes scholars related to the University of Chicago, such as the late Nobel Prize winner, the late Milton Friedman, the late George Stagla, and Richard Pozner at the University of Chicago). The group supported this view. By limiting the scope of the ant i-trade method, the Chicago School has contributed to the enrollment of the ant i-Trust Law to a more reluctant attitude.

Some experts argue that dismantling Big Tech is more complicated than expected and not very useful.

The Chicago Studies were specific and narrow, focused on measurable results, contrasting many people in the mi d-20th century ant i-trade policy incoherence.

"The antitrust law for the 1960s to the early 70s was confused," said Louis Jingales of the Chicago booth. It was unclear what I was trying to achieve. "One of the reasons for Chicago's success was because it was logically and simple in a world with many contradictions and tensions."

However, Jingales' research suggests that the rise in the Chicago school approach in the 1970s was not a simple one that was replaced by a newly improved policy system. He is trying to explain how Chicago and his ideas have dominated the antitrust law policy, along with Philippo Rancheri, a doctor researcher at Zurich Institute of Technology and Eric Posner (Richard's son) at the University of Chicago. The idea of ​​the Chicago school was widely introduced to the policy not because of the voters and members of the Diet elected, but rather the decisions of judges and regulatory authorities that were not selected in elections. They claimed in the 2023 paper.

This may be the same as Ranchi, Posner, and Jinges, which are called the "Story of Enlightenment Technoclato," and the policy expert chooses the best policy argument available from academia. They argue that the Chicago School's successful responsibilities of the Chicago School's success, which are the true beneficiaries of the Chicago school approach, are the main responsibilities of the Chicago school, which affect the execution law execution law. (See why Chicago School had a significant impact on antitrust policy. "

Regardless of the advantages of Gingels and many other people, the consumer welfare standards and the narrow economic approach to the ant i-trading method of the Chicago school, probably useful He pointed out that it has exceeded the gender.

Regulate and legislate

"Gingails did not need to change in 1970, but (the change) was too long." < SPAN> "The antitrust law for the 1960s to the early 70s was confused," said Louis Jingales of the Chicago booth. It was unclear what I was trying to achieve. "One of the reasons for Chicago's success was because it was logically and simple in a world with many contradictions and tensions."

However, Jingales' research suggests that the rise in the Chicago school approach in the 1970s was not a simple one that was replaced by a newly improved policy system. He is trying to explain how Chicago and his ideas have dominated the antitrust law policy, along with Philippo Rancheri, a doctor researcher at Zurich Institute of Technology and Eric Posner (Richard's son) at the University of Chicago. The idea of ​​the Chicago school was widely introduced to the policy not because of the voters and members of the Diet elected, but rather the decisions of judges and regulatory authorities that were not selected in elections. They claimed in the 2023 paper.