I assume the idea is that large companies such as this would have a period of time to scale down operations to the largest size where it still makes sense, and then more competitors would pop up to take over the market share they leave behind. I’m not defending the proposal since I’m too ignorant to have an opinion worth speaking out loud, but that was my interpretation at least.
Seeing as how there are very few massive companies that weren’t created by piecing together smaller companies in the first place it shouldn’t confuse anyone. Also companies spin off parts constantly when they think it’s in their interest so they idea they won’t know how to do it is frivolous.
You could certainly make an argument that my $10bn number is too low, or that there should be a sliding scale of some sort but the concept and it’s likely outcome is very easy to understand.
It's a silly idea because plenty of companies have high revenue and low profit (or net loss), and are not anti-competitive in the slightest. An arbitrary revenue cap doesn't help the situation at all, as evidenced by the steel company.
Nah. Splitting up ArcelorMittal is a fucking great idea.
Our competitive landscape is being absolutely choked by anti-competitive behavior, monopoly, and single point of failure problems in supply chains, labor markets, commodities markets, and everything else.
It’s unsafe and bad for society and we should take decisive and aggressive action to stop it.
Instead we’re so accustomed to it and dulled into submission by decades of corporate PR efforts that people will somehow think it makes sense to reflexively advocate for lawless monopolists[0] on message boards in the name of “growth”.
I am sympathetic to your argument, but it would be stronger if you didn't project the "why" onto a large group of people. It's pretty clear that the reasons are complex, nuanced, and possibly only a problem at scales most of us never encourage. (I think there are probably also benefits of the large size, e.g. Walmart has completely changed what you can buy for low prices, which has incredible value to many people)
Also, I'm not sure the SPOF problems are a result of anti-competitive behavior - AIUI, it's because JIT delivery between different entities is far more cost effective, and the human brain tends to ignore hidden risks.
