What's happening now

seen from Maldives
seen from Finland

seen from China
seen from United States

seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Pakistan
seen from United States
seen from Venezuela

seen from Venezuela
seen from China

seen from Pakistan
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Pakistan
What's happening now
Go check out the latest updates on the OFFICIAL KNIGHTSTONES CHANNEL (and make sure to subscribe so you catch updates and episodes as they come out!)
KnightStones: Production Announcement
STARRING: @adammyers7383
Jayde Hemming
Sanskriti Dwivedi
Emily Dalton
Celestialrand
Avery Wooden
TSDtalks
@fordtato
@JessieGender1
Additional Voices
Colin O'Donnell
Miranda Ketita
& More
Art by @unseenhand1997 @hey-itsanny and Nemo_Bush_Statue
Music by Andres [ThatHoboRavioli]
Written by @adammyers7383 Honey Payla & @tumblingxelian
Special Thanks to Evelyn Aurora
Directed by @adammyers7383 and Honey Payla
Boeing, Spirit and Jetblue, a monopoly horror-story
Catch me in Miami! I'll be at Books and Books in Coral Gables TONIGHT (Jan 22) at 8PM. Berliners: Otherland has added a second date (Jan 28) for my book-talk after the first one sold out - book now!
Last week, William Young, an 82 year old federal judge appointed by Ronald Reagan, blocked the merger of Spirit Airlines and Jetblue. It was a seismic event:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.254267/gov.uscourts.mad.254267.461.0_6.pdf
Seismic because the judge's opinion is full of rhetoric associated with the surging antitrust revival, sneeringly dismissed by corporate apologists as "hipster antitrust." Young called America's airlines and "oligopoly," a situation he blamed on out-of-control mergers. As Matt Stoller writes, this is the first airline merger to be blocked by the DOJ and DOT since deregulation in 1978:
https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/antitrust-enforcers-block-the-jetblue
The judge wasn't shy about why he was reviving a pre-Jimmy Carter theory of antitrust: "[the merger] does violence to the core principle of antitrust law, 'to protect] markets –- and its market participants — from anticompetitive harm."
The legal arguments the judge advances are fascinating and worthy of study:
https://twitter.com/johnmarknewman/status/1747343447227519122
But what really caught my eye was David Dayen's American Prospect article about the judge's commentary on the state of the aviation industry:
https://prospect.org/infrastructure/transportation/01-19-2024-how-boeing-ruined-the-jetblue-spirit-merger/
Why, after all, have Spirit and Jetblue been so ardent in pursuing mergers? Jetblue has had two failed merger attempts with Virgin, and this is the third time they've failed in an attempt to merge with Spirit. Spirit, meanwhile, just lost a bid to merge with Frontier. Why are these two airlines so obsessed with combining with each other or any other airline that will have them?
As Dayen explains, it's because US aviation has been consumed by monopoly, hollowed out to the point of near collapse, thanks to neoliberal policies at every part of the aviation supply-chain. For one thing, there's just not enough pilots, nor enough air-traffic controllers (recall that Reagan's first major act in office was to destroy the air traffic controller's union).
But even more importantly, there are no more planes. Boeing's waitlist for airplane delivery stretches to 2029. And Boeing is about to deliver a lot fewer planes, thanks to its disastrous corner-cutting, which grounded a vast global fleet of 737 Max aircraft (again):
https://prospect.org/infrastructure/transportation/2024-01-09-boeing-737-max-financial-mindset/
The 737 disaster(s) epitomize the problems of inbred, merger-obsessed capitalism. As Luke Goldstein wrote, the rampant defects in Boeing's products can be traced to the decision to approve Boeing's 1997 merger with McDonnell-Douglas, a company helmed by Jack Welch proteges, notorious for cost-cutting at the expense of reliability:
https://prospect.org/infrastructure/transportation/2024-01-09-boeing-737-max-financial-mindset/
Boeing veterans describe the merger as the victory of the bean-counters, which led to a company that chases short-term profits over safety and even the viability of its business:
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=213075
happy late anniversary of me not posting on tumblr online-only mutuals i'm not dead i'm just taking a semi-permanent break from socials because it got to a point where they were really damaging for me mentally and physically so i just. stopped. zero contact except when i steal someone's phone to look at tumblr
there's been a lot of crap i've wanted to post but i think the crowning achievement of me in 2024 was modifying the rules of monopoly to form an oligopoly, aka when multiple companies agree to function as a monopoly for mutual profit and market domination
Market Hegemony
For those that don't know, a Hegemony is not a country that conquered it's neighbour. It's a country that does not need to. Take any country near the US / China / Russia. Take any country near Sparta.
Competition is absolutely crucial to Capitalism. Monopolies are anathema to Capitalism, but Monopolies are pretty easy to recognize. Oligopolies / Cartels are a different story, along with vertical integration.
The best way to explain this comment is a pretty simple phrase: The is no shopping cart in the US that does not meet the standards of Walmart. This is because Walmart is so expansive, it has so many stores, that any shopping cart manufacturer would be foolish to not follow their standards. As such, Walmart has complete control of the shopping cart market.
For Oligopolies, (a small group of sellers):
How do you deal with oligopolies?
That one is actually pretty easy, lower the barriers to entry. In such a situation, a large corporation is less agile, and would have trouble keeping up with changes in the market. Note: Changes in the market happen all of the time. There are also some sneaky practices, like renting shelf-space.
Major companies will have their shelf-space - literally - rented by megacorp suppliers. If you go down the toothpaste aisle, with a hundred options, 94-95 of those options are from one of 2-4 companies. You'll then have one tiny section dedicated to non-megacorp toothpastes.
So:
Prevent large corporations from buying their rivals. I mean, imagine if Disney could not buy Star Wars?
Prevent them from renting shelf-space.
Regulation that supports small stores rather than large ones. Large stores have large footprints, and could only exist through public largesse. So, yes, our cities are creating regulation that supports megacorps.
Since every canton is nearly sovereign on their on, we have another weapon we can use: canton registration.
Legally, there is no such thing as an transnational corporation. What there is is a main/HQ, with every other branch registered in every - single - country, and in federated countries, in every single province/state.
Corporations will beg, they will wheedle, they will wine and dine, and they will bribe.
And the answer is NO.
USA 1990
“Privatization” versus “Oligopolization”
Back when Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos were experiencing real success with their personal spaceflight programs, people were crying that it was the “privatization of spaceflight”.
I’d never heard the word before, and I should have known better than to take this crowd at their word when I assumed they knew what it meant.
"Privatization" means one of two different things. In both cases, a citizen (a private individual) buys something; either public property from a government, or a corporate company from its investors (with the corporation becoming a private company).
Since the United States government didn’t sell NASA to either man, spaceflight wasn’t being privatized in the slightest.
What I thought the word meant was that private citizens were breaking a government monopoly through entrepreneurship.
The proper word would have been oligopolization; like monopolization, but in reverse. A transition from a monopoly (one provider) into an oligopoly (few providers).
Generally, oligopolies aren’t much better than monopolies, but it’s definitely a step towards democratization of services rather than away from it. And realistically, no one but governments or billionaires is going to have the kind of wealth necessary to start such an enterprise.