upvote

points

by lostlogin11 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby filoleg10 hours ago|
next
[-]
Spirit wasn't asking for a government subsidy to get saved from bakruptcy. They were asking to be allowed to get merged with JetBlue (which could've saved them from bankruptcy) and got denied by the government. Those two things aren't the same.
reply
upvoteby rogerrogerr10 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
My understanding is that the Spirit/JetBlue merger was blocked by the Biden DOJ. Were they asking for that again, or was it a different thing that failed in negotiations with the feds recently?
reply
upvoteby gizmo68610 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The negotiations that were occuring directly prior to Spirit's shutdown were not merger related; but a direct government bailout.
reply
upvoteby wallst073 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Biden/Warren backed/forced the DOJ to sue Jetblue/Spirit to block the merger for antitrust.

This doesn't seem to be a antitrust issue at all, it looks like it was one company bailing out another.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-s...

“Our win in court is a victory for U.S. travelers who deserve lower prices and better choices,” said Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. “We fought this case to protect consumers who, as the court recognized, ‘otherwise would have no voice.’ I am incredibly proud of the Antitrust Division’s team and our state law enforcement partners’ tireless advocacy.”

reply
upvoteby eru8 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Two wrongs don't make a right.
reply
upvoteby lostlogin6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I know it’s frowned upon many circles, but regulation can work and do good.

There is plenty of crap legislation and regulation about, but it doesn’t have to be that way.

reply
upvoteby eru5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Yes, but be careful not to commit the 'nirvana fallacy' of comparing real world circumstances against idealised optimal regulation.
reply
upvoteby kelnos2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Sure, that's fair. But often enough I see people (not accusing you of this) doing the opposite: seeing bad regulation, and drawing the conclusion that the only solution is to remove all regulation and "let the market decide".
reply
upvoteby freedomben1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Have you ever tried to get rid of bad regulation? I have, and it is essentially impossible. De-regulation is usually the only path once the initial regulation is in place. It also only ever seems to grow in complexity and onerousness, rarely ever goes the other directin. It's like dealing with a massive legacy codebase that also has the power to throw you in jail.

I'm not against regulation, I think there are areas where it's needed (privacy is a good example), but it is fire, and fire should only be played with when you really need it because it can easily grow out of control and burn things you don't intend to get burned.

reply
upvoteby komali21 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Have you ever tried to regulate an unregulated industry preying upon a population?

Look what it took to wrangle the cigarette industry. Look how unfettered gambling is ripping through the USA.

Or look at industries pre-regulation. Meat, building construction, medicine...

At minimum we have as much evidence that "the market" is capable of being as bad as "bad regulation."

reply
upvoteby happyopossum10 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
[flagged]
reply