Heart breaking: check out the names of (5) South Carolina players that passed away in plen crash….. more details

The lawsuit filed by the Federal Trade Commission to prevent the Kroger-Albertsons supermarket merger began last week, and the stakes for consumers are significant. Chair Lina Khan is once more manipulating antitrust law, and Kamala Harris is applauding the government’s attempt to raise food prices. Staple rivalry has heightened with the development of dollar stores, restricted grouping discounters, stockroom focuses and online retailers. General stores, for example, Kroger and Albertsons have lost ground to bring down estimated retailers. The goal of their $24.6 billion merger is to boost their competitiveness. Customers will save $1 billion as a result of the merger, according to Kroger, and workers will receive $1 billion more in wages and benefits. If competitors lower their prices in response, customers could save more money. But Ms. Khan thinks the main great consolidation is a dead one, and she is utilizing the situation to test novel antitrust speculations. The FTC’s narrow definition of the market as traditional supermarkets is a good place to start. Walmart, Costco, Amazon, Trader Joe’s, Aldi, and numerous other food retailers with diverse business models are not included in this. The FTC says grocery stores offer “one-quit shopping.” That’s true, but the majority of people also shop around for more options and cheaper prices. This is made easier by online commerce. Purchasers who shop at grocery stores regularly continuous undoubtedly four different kinds of basic food item retailers, for example, club stores and supercenters. Assuming Kroger raises costs, individuals have numerous other options. The FTC’s claim that the merger will result in too much market concentration is also undermined by Kroger’s agreement to sell 579 of its roughly 5,000 stores. As a result, the agency is attempting to make the novel claim that the merger will end “head to head” competition. However, competitors would be unable to combine. This was never decided by a court.