How the AI Wars Are Proving That Google Isn’t a Monopoly

(Danny Duchamp, FEE) Google’s share price dropped nearly 10% earlier this month in the wake of Microsoft’s announcement that they are integrating Open AI’s ChatGPT into their search engine. Microsoft’s search engine, Bing, currently accounts for only 3% of web searches, trailing far behind Google’s impressive market share of more than 90%. Google’s dominance in search is so total, and has been stable for so long, that it has led many to accuse Google of being a monopoly.

Claims of monopoly are common in political discourse, and they have been made against Google by all sides of the political compass. In 2020, Senator Ted Cruz accused Google of using its “monopoly” power to stifle conservative voices. In 2019, Senator Bernie Sanders expressed his desire to break Google up over its alleged monopoly status. In January of this year, the Justice Department sued Google for “monopolizing” digital advertising, which is the way Google monetizes its search service.

First, we should understand what a monopoly is.

The simplest and most common sense definition of the word “monopoly” is a provider of a good or service with no competitors. In this sense, Google is obviously not a monopoly because it has always had competitors. It has massively outperformed them, but they never disappeared; a competitor with just 3% of the market is still a competitor.

Economists will often use a more sophisticated definition of monopoly. In this understanding, we start by considering what the problem with a monopoly would be. A monopoly could raise its prices and lower its quality without losing customers to competitors—because there are none. It is then reasoned that when a company is in a very dominant market position (even if it is not completely without competitors) it may be able to leverage status quo bias, economies of scale, network effects, and other benefits of being a dominant market player to engage in those same monopolistic behaviors. This is supposed to make it useful to refer to some companies as “monopolies,” even if their market share is less than 100 percent.

The problem with applying this to Google is that it would predict that a competitor should not be able to threaten them, even by providing a superior product. The recent Microsoft announcement, and the reaction to it, clashes with this prediction. If Google is really a monopoly, why would investors be worried about a competitor developing a new product? Why would Google scramble to put together a half-baked AI event of its own at the last minute?

They wouldn’t.

Given how obvious this is, what makes Cruz, Sanders, and the Justice Department so confident in their accusations? You might think that they are simply lying, but the more likely answer is “rational irrationality.”

Rational irrationality is a term coined by economist Bryan Caplan in his book The Myth of The Rational Voter. Essentially, it is the idea that people will convince themselves of things that are pleasant or convenient to believe when they pay no cost for being wrong.

“Rational irrationality is a modest refinement of existing models of human behavior. Assuming that all people are fully rational all the time is bad economics. It makes more sense to assume that people tailor their degree of rationality to the costs of error.”

Caplan applies this primarily to voters in his book, but the logic applies just as well to politicians and government agencies.

It does not take much rational thought to see why Google is simply not a monopoly. But Cruz does not like Google’s habit of censoring those of his political persuasion. He knows that people are more willing to support government action against Google if it is classified as a “monopoly.” Finally, he does not pay any cost for being wrong if he calls it a monopoly when it isn’t one. He therefore convinces himself that Google is a monopoly.

Though the preferences and incentives are different for Sanders and The Department of Justice, the logic is the same. They want to be able to classify Google as a monopoly. If they decide that Google is a monopoly, and they are wrong, they pay no cost. So they say that Google is a monopoly, and they probably believe it.

Investors, on the other hand, do pay a cost for being wrong. If Google really is a monopoly, they shouldn’t be worried about the new Bing, and they should stay invested. If Google is just a successful company in the free market of search, however, then Microsoft may be a significant threat, and perhaps they should pull out their capital assets. If investors are wrong, they stand to lose everything they have invested. Investors don’t have the luxury of being rationally irrational.

To be clear, it is not yet known for certain whether AI-powered Bing is going to take over the search industry. But what is known is that investors are taking the possibility very seriously, demonstrating that they do not believe Google is a monopoly. And given that these investors have a much stronger incentive to be rational on this matter, we’d be wise to put much more stock in their opinions than in the opinions of politicians and pundits.

Lightfoot Loses Re-Election Bid in Chicago Mayor Race

(Andrew Hensel, The Center Square) Lori Lightfoot’s tenure as Chicago mayor will end after her first term.

Lightfoot – widely criticized as rising violent crime plagued the city during her four years in office, for her strict COVID-19 restrictions, and as students in Chicago Public Schools struggled to perform at grade level – conceded in her race for re-election in Tuesday’s primary.

Former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas and Cook County Commissioner and Chicago Teachers Union operative Brandon Johnson will head to a runoff election to determine Lightfoot’s successor.

Vallas held a healthy lead with more than 90% of precincts reporting, receiving about 35% of the total votes counted.

Since no candidate received more than 50% of the vote, the election will go to a runoff on April 4.

During his campaign, Vallas focused on high violent crime rates in the city and reforming policing. Chicago has been the murder capital of the U.S. for nine consecutive years.

Johnson, who surged in polling in recent weeks, finished in second place, earning a runoff against Vallas. Johnson is a staunch supporter of public employee unions.

“Brandon Johnson’s platform on the issues Chicagoans care about stands in stark contrast to what new polling shows Chicagoans want,” Illinois Policy Institute spokesman Austin Berg said in a statement released late Tuesday. “Sixty-two percent of Chicagoans support school choice. Brandon Johnson and the Chicago Teachers Union want to crush school choice.”

Six other candidates also were eliminated from contention Tuesday night, including Congressman Jesus “Chuy” Garcia.

The World Bank Takes a Wrong Turn

(Rupert Darwall, RealClear Wire) President Biden’s nomination of Ajay Banga, the former CEO of Mastercard, to succeed David Malpass as World Bank president suggests that the Biden administration is prioritizing climate change over the World Bank’s founding mission of poverty eradication and economic development. This was made clear in the president’s statement singling out climate change as the most urgent challenge of our time.

Banga’s nomination turns the clock back four years, to the end of the tenure of Dr. Jim Yong Kim, who had been nominated by President Obama in 2012. Under Kim, the World Bank became an anti-development bank, allowing itself to be captured by climate activists at the expense of the world’s poorest people.

A year after Kim’s appointment, the World Bank adopted a blanket ban on financing new coal-fired power stations – this despite coal being, for many developing nations, the cheapest and most reliable fuel for generating capacity. In 2017, on the second anniversary of the Paris agreement, Kim announced that the World Bank would extend its financing ban to the development of upstream oil and gas.

Keeping fossil fuels in the ground might be gratifying for rich Europeans, but for many developing countries, it is little short of a death sentence. Over two billion people burn biomass – wood or animal dung – for cooking and heating, causing hazardous indoor pollution responsible for an estimated two million deaths annually. To anyone other than a green ideologue, preventing poor countries from developing their own natural resources retards these nations’ economic development and constrains their ability to lift people out of poverty.

Malpass had been chosen by the Trump administration to return the World Bank to its original mission – though without overturning the constraints on the bank’s energy policies that he’d inherited. Nonetheless, that wasn’t good enough for the likes of Al Gore. During a New York Times event last September, Gore denounced Malpass as a climate denier. “For God’s sake, this is ridiculous to have a climate denier as the head of the World Bank,” Gore bellowed. “We need to get rid of that leadership, put new leadership in, and I hope President Biden will take that initiative.” It was something that John Kerry, Biden’s climate envoy, had also been pushing for.

Speaking later at the same event as Gore, Malpass declined to comment as to whether human greenhouse gas emissions were causing a rapid and dangerous warming of the planet. (Afterward, though, Malpass told CNN that it’s clear that greenhouse gas emissions are coming from manmade sources, including fossil fuels, “so we’re working hard to change that.”) Indeed, in a recent tweet thread, climate scientist Roger Pielke Jr. finds no increasing trends of extreme weather events – if anything, we’re seeing a reversal. Nowadays, not offering an opinion on climate change is tantamount to an admission of being guilty of wrong-think.

The beneficiaries of Gore’s hit job won’t be the world’s poor. They consume far too little energy, and the extra greenhouse gas emissions that would result from their gaining access to reliable energy wouldn’t make any difference to the trajectory of overall emissions. In 2021, Africa’s population of 1.4 billion people consumed a total of 897.5 Terra Watt hours of electricity, amounting to only 3.2 percent of global electricity consumption and equivalent to an average of 644 Kilowatt hours per head annually – about what American households use on average every three weeks.

Inducing developing nations to rely almost exclusively on intermittent energy sources like wind and solar, when advanced nations haven’t solved the inherent intermittency problem of renewables, condemns the world’s poor to indefinite servitude. From their perspective, the developed world is pulling a con. It promises $100 billion a year in climate finance and is now helping itself to development finance – all the while telling developing nations, “Here’s the climate aid we promised you.”

The winners: Wall Street and China. Typically, World Bank funding is used in project-finance structures so that the bank takes the first hit if projects fail to generate anticipated revenues, thus shielding private finance from risk, which is presumably why Gore helped engineer Malpass’s ouster. China benefits, as it has used coal-based energy and Uighur slave labor to dominate the global supply of solar photovoltaic panels and holds a commanding position in the production of rare-earth elements used in wind turbines. Better still, from China’s point of view, all this will be subsidized by the American taxpayer, as the United States is the World Bank’s largest funder, with 2.7 times as many subscription rights as China.

It’s hard to see a future Republican administration tolerating this. As the Biden administration’s nominee, Banga has been given a climate script that he will be compelled to follow. The situation raises an existential question about the World Bank and its purpose. In a 1998 paper, Anne Krueger, a former vice president for research at the bank, argued that after the opening up of global capital markets to most countries outside Africa, the World Bank faced three choices: it could be a development bank focused solely on poor countries; it could continue to operate in all developing countries, but focus on “soft issues” like the environment; or it could close down.

Republican administrations favor the first option and Democrats the second. The economist Deepak Lal, who also served as a research administrator at the bank, argued that the second option is not viable, as it leads the bank to support “highly contentious issues on which there is limited agreement about either ends or means.” Lal concluded that this left only Krueger’s shutdown option. Malpass’s departure and Banga’s nomination bring closure a step closer.

Libs of TikTok Creates Anti-Predator Book for Kids

(Dmytro “Henry” Aleksandrov, Headline USA) Libs of TikTok creator Chaya Raichik is going to release a children’s book that is meant to protect kids from pedophiles and other groomers who want to “sexualize them and confuse them about their identity.”

“We need to be proactive in this fight. Instead of reacting to all the new ideas from bad actors who are talking to children, we need to go on offense,” she said. “I want to get this message to kids before they encounter that situation.”

No More Secrets: The Candy Cavern, which is scheduled for release on March 14 by Brave Books, is the story of a young lamb whose teacher tells her to not tell one’s parents about the candy and cakes he gets from the teacher that, in the end, turns out to be a predator — specifically, a wolf, according to the Daily Signal.

Raichik explained that one of her goals in writing the book was to reconnect parents and kids, while navigating a leftist social media landscape that wants to sever that relationship.

“So, my book basically teaches that lesson, that if a kid spots that behavior where a trusted adult is telling them, ‘Don’t tell your parents. Keep a secret from your parents,’ and tries to circumvent the parent, you should know that’s predatory behavior, and it can lead to dangerous things, and you should obviously right away have that conversation with their parents,” Raichik said.

“I want [children] to be able to, when they see that behavior, right away be able to spot it and know that this is wrong, and then be able to have that confidence to go have a conversation with their parents.”

According to Raichik, the primary goal of the book is to protect children of the next generation by giving them tools to ward off those who want to destroy their childhood innocence.

“What kind of country are we going to have if we just have a society full of these adults who are just confused about their identity?” she said. “I think [the activists] just want a chaotic and destructive society, and I’m going to try to stop that.”

From Waco to Jan. 6 and Beyond, ‘Extremist’ Trope Used to Justify Gov’t Tyranny

(Ken Silva, Headline USA) Today is the 30th anniversary of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms beginning its infamous siege of a religious compound in Waco, Texas, which ultimately resulted in four dead ATF agents and 82 murdered civilians, including 25 children and two pregnant women.

The ATF and FBI’s criminality at Waco is well documented. As author James Bovard explained in a Monday article for the New York Post, the ATF’s operation “was a sham from the start.”

But what allowed ATF and FBI agents to kill innocent Americans with impunity? This is perhaps best explained by PhD historian Wendy Painting in her book, Aberration in the Heartland of the Real.

Aberration shows that the U.S. government was able to publicly dehumanize the Branch Davidians—an offshoot of the Seventh Day Adventists—at Waco as a “dangerous extremist organization” and a “cult.”

Painting explains in her book that the government was able to disseminate these claims about the Branch Davidians by colluding with a shady lobbying group called the Cult Awareness Network, which in turn spread disinformation throughout the media. As Painting notes, the Cult Awareness Network, or CAN, is closely linked to the CIA via the late psychologist Dr. Jolyon West, a former CAN member who also worked on the CIA’s MKUltra mind control program.

According to Aberration, ranking members of the CAN acted as consultants to the ATF and FBI during the siege. CAN spokespeople also appeared regularly in the media—spreading false stories about the depravity of the Davidians and publicly urging the FBI to use lethal force against them.

“In response to a growing public outcry and criticism about the massive military buildup at Waco, Attorney General Janet Reno and President Bill Clinton capitalized on the moral panic generated by CAN and repeated the unfounded claims and outright lies to the American people,” Painting writes in Aberration.

“In doing so, they further demonized the Davidians and largely neutralized criticism about all manner of illegalities that had already, and were about to, occur in Waco.”

Along with spreading disinformation—including the unsubstantiated claims that Koresh was abusing children at the Waco compound—the labeling of the Davidians as an extremist cult may have underpinned the FBI’s decision to use psychological operations against the group, according to Aberration. Psyops, supposedly used in an attempt to draw the Davidians out from their compound, included blasting sounds of dying rabbits and flooding bright lights into the compound for days on end.

Far from succeeding in their purported goal, CAN’s tactics “aided the FBI and ATF’s dehumanizing disinformation campaign against the Davidians and reinforced the unfortunate perception that the events at Waco had been necessary and the deaths there inevitable,” according to Painting.

Thirty years later, the ATF still labels the Davidians as a cult on its website, and the dehumanizing claims about the victims at Waco are still widely repeated in the mainstream media.

The U.S. government also continues to use the same dehumanizing labels it foisted on the Davidians 30 years ago—deeming homeschoolers, COVID vaccine skeptics, certain religious organizations and other dissident groups as potential “extremists.” In fact, a leaked DHS bulletin from last year warns that the Waco massacre is one of the “significant events” referenced by modern anti-government “extremists.”

And as they did 30 years ago, the U.S. government and its sycophants justify events such as the killing of Jan. 6 protestor Ashli Babbitt, the lengthy pretrial detention of other Jan. 6 defendants and the mass surveillance of political dissidents on the grounds that the victims of these abuses are extremists.

In his Monday New York Post article, Bovard wondered whether the mainstream media will ever recognize that current anti-government sentiment was fueled by events such as Waco.

But in order for the mainstream media to do that, they’d have to admit their own culpability in slandering dissidents—from the Branch Davidians to current political groups—as extremists.

Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.

Georgia Farm Discriminated Against American Workers to Hire Foreigners

(Ezekiel Loseke, Headline USA) A Georgia farm used unfair hiring practices that discriminated against Americans on behalf of migrant workers.

The farm is wholesale plant nursery in Greensboro, Georgia, and is owned by Pure Beauty Farm Inc., a Miami based company, reported Breitbart News.

Pure Beauty Farm Inc. actively discriminated against American workers with their hiring processes, according to a report by the Department of Labor.

Pure Beauty Farm Inc. “Gave preferential treatment to H-2A program workers by requiring U.S. applicants to have certain nursery work experience and to provide references, steps not required for foreign workers,” the report reads.

“The employer rejected 29 U.S. applicants as a result, including several who previously performed the same job for Pure Beauty.”

This practice is unfortunately common, according to Wage and Hour Division Director Steven Salazar.

“The federal H-2A program exists to help employers fill jobs in the agricultural industry when they can’t find U.S. workers,” he explained. “Too often, our investigators discover violations and abuses, and find U.S. workers  have been illegally bypassed in the recruitment and hiring process.”

The H-2A visa program allows American agricultural companies to outsource their agricultural jobs to foreign workers who can stay for up to three years and bring their families over with H4 visas, according to Breitbart News.

The repetitive and systemic abuse of the H-2A may be seen in a lawsuit filed by black Americans last year.

In that case, six black farm workers alleged that their employer, Pitts Farms, used the H-2A visa program to bring in South African workers to do the same work as they did.

The lawsuit said the farm began bringing in white workers from South Africa in 2014, using a placement firm to hire seasonal labor. It also alleged that from 2014 to 2020, the farm did not make the same effort to recruit U.S. workers as it did to hire immigrants.

Biden Makes Cringeworthy Race Joke At Black History Month Event

(Headline USA) President Joe Biden joked that he is a “white boy” but he’s “not stupid” during a Black History Month event at the White House this week.

Biden made the cringeworthy remark after joking that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., who is black, no longer talks to him.

“I may be a white boy, but I’m not stupid. I know where the power is … you think I’m joking. I learned a long time ago about the Divine Nine,” he said, referring to a group of black fraternities and sororities.

Biden went on to slam Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis during the reception, accusing the governor of suppressing black history.

“It’s important to say from the White House for the entire country to hear: History matters. History matters and black history matters. I can’t just choose to learn what we want to know. We learn what we should know. We have to learn everything, the good, the bad, the truth, and who we are as a nation,” Biden said.

This isn’t the first time Biden has landed himself in hot water over his racial gaffes. During his run for the presidency in 2020, he claimed that if black voters are “figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump,” then “you ain’t black.”

A few months later, he claimed blacks were less diverse than Hispanics.

“By the way, what you all know, but most people don’t know, unlike the African American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly different attitudes about different things,” he said at the time.

Later that day, Biden asked a black reporter if he was a “junkie” after the reporter asked whether Biden would take a cognitive test.

“No, I haven’t taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test?” Biden asked. “Come on, man. That’s like saying to you, before you got on this program, if you had to take a test where you’re taking cocaine or not. What do you think, huh? Are you a junkie?”

Marjorie Taylor Greene Attacked By Woman in Restaurant

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga. said she was viciously attacked Monday night while dining at a restaurant.

Greene said the woman who attacked her did so in the company of her son, who was also yelling at her.

“I was attacked in a restaurant tonight by an insane woman and screamed at by her adult son,” she tweeted. “They had no respect for the restaurant or the staff or the other people dining or people like me who simply have different political views.”

The pro-MAGA lawmaker noted that she was minding her business before her vicious attackers turned into “uncontrollable demons” because she has opposing political views.

This is not the first time Greene has been persecuted for her positions.

She has been “swatted” multiple times by anonymous pranksters calling police to respond to phony incidents at her home in northwest Georgia.

Even CNN was forced to admit that one leftist assailant had lied after waging an online smear attack on the second-term congresswoman.

Twitter user Lindy Li falsely claimed Greene did not clap for Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during his speech to Congress.

Recently, a New York man pleaded guilty to threatening to harm Greene via voicemail.

According to The Hill, the voicemails were very disturbing: “I’m gonna have to take your life into my own hands,” said Joseph Francis Morelli. “I’m gonna hurt you. Physically, I’m gonna harm you.”

Morelli is currently facing up to five years in prison and a maximum fine of $250,000.

Yet, Greene is still not safe because he threatened to pay someone to attack her even if he gets locked up.

Government Watchdog To Investigate Buttigieg’s Use of Gov’t Private Jets

(Headline USA) The Transportation Department inspector general revealed this week that Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is under investigation for his use of government-funded private jets.

A memo issued on Monday by DOT watchdog Charles Ward revealed plans to audit Buttigieg’s use of Federal Aviation Administration planes. The investigation follows reports that Buttigieg has used used the government planes on more than a dozen occasions.

“We will conduct an audite to determine whether the Office of the Secretary complied with Federal regulations, policies, and procedures regarding executive travel on DOT aircraft,” Ward’s memo read. “The audit will focus on official trips taken since January 31, 2017. We plan to begin this audit shortly.”

A spokesperson for Buttigieg claimed the secretary only used FAA planes when it was determined to be “more cost effective” than flying commercial. While the exact taxpayer cost of Buttigieg’s flights is unclear, the FAA has charged federal agencies roughly $5,000 per hour to use its fleet in the past, according to the Washington Post.

“We welcome this independent audit moving forward in order to put some of the false, outlandish, and cynical claims about the Secretary’s mode of travel to rest,” the spokesperson said.

Buttigieg “flies commercially the vast majority of the time,” the spokesperson insisted.

Buttigieg also released a statement on the matter, claiming that he only flies private to “save taxpayer money.”

Flight data shows Buttigieg has used government jets at least 18 times since taking office, according to Fox News.

Republicans have ramped up their calls for Buttigieg to resign in recent weeks, citing his delayed response to the East Palestine, Ohio, toxic train derailment as evidence of his lack of qualification for the job.

“For two years, Secretary Buttigieg downplayed and ignored crisis after crisis, while prioritizing topics of little relevance to our nation’s transportation system,” Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., wrote in a recent letter to President Joe Biden. “It is painfully clear to the American people that Secretary Buttigieg has little regard for the duties of the Secretary of Transportation.”

Calls Increase for Proof-of-Life from Reportedly Brain-Dead Fetterman

(Jacob Bruns, Headline USA) Calls for stroke victim Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., to produce verifiable proof-of-life have increased after a cryptic statement from his communications director failed to address dire claims about his boss’s health.

Fetterman, who consistently misled voters about his health problems before and during last November’s midterm election, has not been seen or heard from publicly since he checked into a hospital weeks ago, allegedly suffering from depression. A tweet over the weekend from conservative talk-show host John Cardillo called for an investigation into accounts that Fetterman was “essentially brain dead and it’s being hidden.”

Fetterman’s office on Monday tweeted only that the Senator was “doing well, working with the wonderful doctors, and remains on a path to recovery,” but failed to address the dire claim about Fetterman’s health.

The omission reportedly spurred Sean Logue, chairman of Pennsylvania’s Washington County Republican Party, to demand full transparency from Fetterman, refusing “to take assurances from the Office of the Senator or Democrat operatives that Fetterman is able to carry out his duties as Senator.”

He reportedly called “upon Senator Fetterman to appear on camera to show us he is alive and well.”

Now a growing chorus has taken up the call for Fetterman’s office to produce proof-of-life, or at least functional brain activity.

“Same thing we asked of Rep. David Scott, who was not seen in person or on media during an active campaign,” noted Caesar Gonzales, who ran an unsuccessful tilt against Rep. Scott, D-Ga., adding that Scott “voted by proxy on a $1.7T omnibus bill, and was heard but not seen during the Speaker Confirmation Hearings.”

Gonzales wasn’t alone in his concerns about the state of Fetterman’s health, with upset constituents also demanding more information.

Others claimed that Fetterman’s doctor, who allegedly tried to resuscitate his brain, had been silenced, despite trying to make the announcement.

Right on cue, the mainstream media swooped in to ensure Americans that Fetterman is “on the path to recovery” from his depression.

Joe Calvello, Fetterman’s communications director, noted that the recovery will be “a weeks-long process,” and as a result the media would not be getting any updates.

However, public patience is likely to wear thin if Fetterman’s mental health remains in its current state come summertime.

In his original post, Cardillo hinted that by failing to set a special election at least 90 days ahead of the Nov. 7 municipal elections, far-left Gov. Josh Shapiro would allow Fetterman—or his proxy—to remain in office for at least another year until the 2024 general election.

Headline USA’s Mark Pellin contributed to this report