Market consolidation, exemplified by potential media mergers, stifles competition and raises consumer prices. This process effectively transfers wealth from younger, poorer consumers to older, wealthier shareholders, functioning as a regressive tax that exacerbates economic inequality.
When the executive branch directly influences the regulatory outcome of a corporate deal, it constitutes state control over the means of production. This undermines the rule of law and free market principles, ironically fitting the definition of socialism regardless of the political party in power.
Top universities with billion-dollar endowments should lose their tax-free status if they fail to grow enrollment. By artificially limiting admissions, they behave like exclusive luxury brands (e.g., "Birkin bags") that cater to the wealthy, rather than fulfilling their mission as engines of social mobility and public service.
When evaluating a media merger, regulators should narrowly define the market as "premium streaming platforms." Including user-generated content like YouTube or TikTok creates a misleadingly broad market definition that understates a company's true dominance, similar to a chicken producer claiming competition from pistachio farmers.
