Make a case for antitrust, but say it is a case for "deregulation" instead, because your master thesis is that the problem is "the left" is gumming up the works.
(To be fair, measured productivity can rise in a sclerotic monopolized economy as rents are scored in GDP and the weight of them on purses can lead to underemployment and a smaller denominator. But I don't think that's what Matt's after.)
from #MattYglesias https://www.slowboring.com/p/its-not-just-biden
Text: The basic picture is that we would like Americans to be able to buy more goods and services, and we want that in a world where we no longer have a huge pool of unemployed people who could be re-employed by providing those services. So we need policies that are geared toward increasing efficiency and productivity. That could mean taking on Dem-aligned interest groups by reforming Davis-Bacon or Jones Act rules. It could mean taking on GOP-aligned interest groups like car dealerships. Or, it could mean ideologically ambiguous options, like reducing land use regulations or freer trade or making it easier to site renewable energy projects and transmission lines. But it does, more or less, mean deregulation of some kind. Which means actually focusing on things that — unlike the junk fee crackdown — aren’t on the laundry list of progressive agenda items that you’d expect a Democratic administration to pursue in any macroeconomic circumstances.