Anti-Trust is Anti-Growth?

DOJ blocked the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile because it "allows consumers to benefit from competition." In other words, it allows for a deliberately structured organization of risk that makes the risk-taker retain the risk.

Deconsolidation of the risk empowers the consumer with value (the benefit) inherently coefficient to the risk (value that consolidation captures and redistributes in the form detriment, which demonstrates power). Risk-value is structurally coefficient, and in order to maintain that efficiency it is necessary to keep industry and markets unconsolidated.

Preventing consolidation of industry and markets is good public policy because it retains risk in the alpha dimension, and good public policy makes for sound investing. It reduces the uncertain probability--the beta volatility--of the risk and its accumulation in the gamma dimension where it resides as massive public debt.

If capitalism is synonymous with the free market, then why does it seek to avoid it in priority?

Wall Street will be sure to complain that anti-trust is anti-growth. Regulatory authority, they will contend, is preventing the "free" flow of capital, which inhibits growth and kills jobs. The truth, however, is just the opposite.

The anti-growth argument perpetrates a fraud.

Consolidation is a false efficiency. It is a false valuation of the risk proportion.

While the "urge to merge" is always touted to be a sign of recovery, it is really an indication of even more consolidated risk. Not only is risk more consolidated, it is more volatile.

Now that the risk accumulates and detrimentally distributes with an ever-higher frequency, the detriment is not only more extensive, but the cycle is becoming more compressed.

High-frequency compression of a growing risk proportion is beyond fully gamma, meaning it is being accumulated in a hyper-catastrophic proportion.

Anti-trust is supposed to relieve (deconsolidate) the growing pressure (the catastrophic risk proportion), but the current regulatory authority is far too little and far too late.

While the trend to administrate an alpha-risk proportion from the gamma-risk dimension may look promising, the Obama administration is too far right to effect the deconsolidation needed to reverse such a highly charged deflationary trend.

The Obama administration is nothing but a false positive. Populist rhetoric with a right-wing program will keep us trending deflationary.

If we are looking for signs of recovery, we must be sure to identify signs that only appear to be positive.