Yeah, no way I'm clicking that sketchy website.
It's a substack blog with a custom top-level domain, pretty safe. Matt Stoller writes a lot about the tensions between monopoly/corporate power and democracy in the context of US history- he's legit.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
These new legal requirements will force private equity firms to tell the Pentagon whether they are mucking around with weapons makers.
Using metaphor of blindness to sight is common throughout human history, because everyone understands what it means to open your eyes.
In August, I wrote up an important shift among antitrust enforcers, in a piece titled “Government Stupidity Is a Design Choice.” In it, I described how the Federal Trade Commission and Antitrust Division, prompted by Congress, tweaked a form, called the Hart Scott Rodino form, that companies must fill out when they want to engage in any corporate acquisition worth over $100 million.
Dealmakers will now have to answer basic questions, such as “Why are you merging?” “Who is on your board of directors?” “How does your industry work?” “Who is lending money for the buy-out?” They will have to give information upfront about subsidiaries, their product lines, defense contracts, their power in labor markets, and previous acquisitions, which is particularly important when a firm is rolling up a lot of smaller entities.
The government got virtually no useful information from it, meaning that every day a government lawyer would receive a bunch of notifications that two random companies are merging, and he’d have to start with virtually no information, and then with a few hours of research decide which were worth investigating.
But while corporate lawyers might be mad about this change among antitrust enforcers, now they’ll have to deal with another part of the government getting that same X-Ray machine.
The original article contains 562 words, the summary contains 254 words. Saved 55%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News