Ken Heyer, Nov 01, 2006
The author argues for using the total welfare standard, rather than the more commonly employed consumer welfare standard. In doing so, Heyer responds to three broad objections that have been raised. One is that use of a total welfare standard conflicts with antitrust law, or at least with legal precedent. A second is that employing a total welfare standard would clearly be more costly for antitrust agencies than employing one or another flavor of a consumer welfare standard. A third is that the total welfare standard ignores important distributional considerations considerations that are better treated under some form of consumer welfare standard. Each of these objections is evaluated, and ultimately found unpersuasive.
Links to Full Content
Featured News
DirecTV Urges Second Circuit to Revive Antitrust Lawsuit Against Nexstar
Dec 9, 2024 by
CPI
Omnicom and Interpublic Unite in $13.25B Deal: Big Tech Competition Heats Up
Dec 9, 2024 by
CPI
Federal Ruling Highlights DOJ’s Push Against Algorithmic Collusion in Antitrust Cases
Dec 9, 2024 by
CPI
Judge’s Decision on Kroger-Albertsons Merger Expected Soon
Dec 9, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Urged to Resolve Legal Standoff Over Amazon and Flipkart Investigation
Dec 9, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Moats & Entrenchment
Nov 29, 2024 by
CPI
Assessing the Potential for Antitrust Moats and Trenches in the Generative AI Industry
Nov 29, 2024 by
Allison Holt, Sushrut Jain & Ashley Zhou
How SEP Hold-up Can Lead to Entrenchment
Nov 29, 2024 by
Jay Jurata, Elena Kamenir & Christie Boyden
The Role of Moats in Unlocking Economic Growth
Nov 29, 2024 by
CPI
Overcoming Moats and Entrenchment: Disruptive Innovation in Generative AI May Be More Successful than Regulation
Nov 29, 2024 by
Simon Chisholm & Charlie Whitehead