So...because it is easy to control the economy by breaking up monopolies and oligopolies by the government---we must get there first by using the government to break them up. A more absurd rationale I have never heard. So, what you want to do is "pre-emptive" control of the economy, by...using the government to violate the free market.
You would have to begin by sorting out why Blackrock is in violation of some law, and I think you would have nothing to fall back on. You want Blackrock broken up simply because you want it broken up. There is no lack of competition among large amounts of investment.
The problem of Blackrock proceeds from a completely separate issue: the definition of a person in law. To put it simply, corporate ownership should be a democracy of the shareholders---but the law should maintain that shares can be bought and held only by actual human persons, not legal entities. Stock brokers can facilitate buying and selling and stewardship of shares, but they must not be in a position of casting votes in shareholder meetings. Where Blackrock is a problem, is that they use the legal fiction of a corporation being a "person" to enable a corporation to gather tremendous amounts of stock under its control and then use that to dominate shareholder decisions. If an individual millionaire or billionaire wants to do that, fair is fair, but at least he has to put up his own money, which is a deterrent.
Yes. by breaking up MONOPOLIES and the O's.
Because that's how governments do control supply and demand.
That's my point dude.
it's much harder for government to control supply and demand when their are many vendors to compete.
Unless they went out full communist.
The American government knows the people will not accept communism.
So they used big business as back door.
So...because it is easy to control the economy by breaking up monopolies and oligopolies by the government---we must get there first by using the government to break them up. A more absurd rationale I have never heard. So, what you want to do is "pre-emptive" control of the economy, by...using the government to violate the free market.
You are not a friend of the free market, at all.
I am for breaking up companies like BLACKROCK.
Breaking up a company is a complicated thing that isn't black and white. You do know that right?
As though you knew how to do it.
You would have to begin by sorting out why Blackrock is in violation of some law, and I think you would have nothing to fall back on. You want Blackrock broken up simply because you want it broken up. There is no lack of competition among large amounts of investment.
The problem of Blackrock proceeds from a completely separate issue: the definition of a person in law. To put it simply, corporate ownership should be a democracy of the shareholders---but the law should maintain that shares can be bought and held only by actual human persons, not legal entities. Stock brokers can facilitate buying and selling and stewardship of shares, but they must not be in a position of casting votes in shareholder meetings. Where Blackrock is a problem, is that they use the legal fiction of a corporation being a "person" to enable a corporation to gather tremendous amounts of stock under its control and then use that to dominate shareholder decisions. If an individual millionaire or billionaire wants to do that, fair is fair, but at least he has to put up his own money, which is a deterrent.