What a great use of my tax dollars.

As far as I know local bottlers have been a thing for a long time yes. I remember TV ads for soda with a tack on slogan at the end from the bottling company. “Bottled by the good guys at Kalil”

It could work! Although, if you’re already getting a $50,000++ SUV it’s going to take a pretty big number to make you rethink your purchase.

Some other regulation to dissuade companies from selling bigger vehicles would help.

Maybe do something to raise the price of gas so filling up a 20-40 gallon SUV looks a lot less affordable than an economy car. (Of course that would also fuck the economy silly but so will climate change).

I kind of miss the small 2000-2400 lb cars of the 90s. My little 2 door Sentra SE-R got 25 mpg city and 35 mpg hwy and always fast passed the emissions dyno test.

I was comparing the Corolla, 2000 and 2023 model years. While the new one gets slightly better mileage, it is 600 lb heavier. I’m assuming the weight is in part due to the reinforced cabin and doors and a bazillion miles of wiring for all the additional computers and electronics. I wonder what kind of mileage a 2500 lb car would get with a modern drivetrain.

True… I think even if they don’t, it’s still potentially anti-competitive.

(Gawd, Imagine how life would be with gas station incompatibility with your car. Holy shit that would suck).

Yes except everyone knows YouTube has a massive, massive market advantage in that space. And the channel you want to watch isn’t on the others. And you know this too.

I don’t feel your analogy quite captures what is going on here because both McDonald’s and Taco Bell are in the same business. Maybe if you explain it more.

Google owns a major web destination, YouTube, essentially a line of business in its own right, in addition to Chrome, also its own distinct product. Firefox competes with Chrome but Google is allegedly using market dominance with YouTube to make it harder for Firefox to compete.

If a company owns two products A and B and if A is used to access B, company cannot hinder competitors to A via fuckery in B.

This is the kind of thing that MS got in trouble for – using Windows to tip the scales in favor of Internet Explorer by tightly integrating it into the OS.

McDonald’s prohibiting people from using their restaurant, which is not itself a separate product with a separate market. Nobody is clamoring to go to McDonald’s restaurant spaces to sit and eat. It’s just part of the restaurant offering. So there is no leverage like there is with YouTube being used against a competitor for a totally different product. And besides, Taco Bell can do the same as McDonald’s. They’re on equal footing.

If in your analogy there were some other product that McDonald’s owned that could penalize you for going to Taco Bell your analogy would work.

• Google – Ford
• Mozilla – Chevy
• Firefox – Chevy car
• Chrome – Ford Car
• YouTube – Ford gas station

In my other comment I provide a link to the US DOJ anti-trust complaint center website.

Yes. The US DOJ has a website for reporting antitrust concerns

🙄 No it would be like Ford owning gas stations and pumping faster for Ford vehicles than Chevy.

Enshittification of “enshittification”

/s