Price fixing by algorithm is still price fixing
Price fixing by algorithm is still price fixing
www.ftc.gov
Price fixing by algorithm is still price fixing
70 comments
-
-
-
A capitalist economic system will always lead to capitalists in power.
-
Without hope, all is lost. I would rather hang on to a shred of hope than give up.
-
-
Society shouldn't be set up to keep people renting for their entire lives. It was like 3 generations ago that you could realistically get a home in your 30's on a single paycheck.
-
Yeh, but unregulated capitalism
-
Can't speak for the veracity, but I've got two magnets with the following:
1934
Average income = $1,601.00
Loaf of bread = $.08
Gallon of gas = $.10
Gallon of milk = $.45New car = $625.00
New house = $5,972.001958
Average income = $4,650.00
Loaf of bread = $.19
Gallon of gas = $.24
Gallon of milk = $1.01New car = $2,155.00
New house = $11,975.00 -
-
i really wish we could mute words on here, because anyone throwing around the word 'entitled' definitely has sinister motives at best
yes, people are ENTITLED to a place to live without being gouged their whole lives.
-
“Places you can’t afford”, like teachers and nurses wanting to live in the same county as their place of employment?
-
You must be a sad person, go to hell, I’ll never see your response
-
Sorry homie the cities have the jobs. People need to be able to afford to live near where they work for our economy to function well. They need to be able to buy stuff to support other jobs nearby. It's a virtuous cycle when it works, but housing costs sap that money away.
-
Just leave the area where your job is zzz
-
Jesus Christ let's ignore this boomer dinosaur
Go back to reddit
-
-
Wanting to live where there are jobs, grocery stores, and health care facilities within a reasonable distance is not entitlement.
Or maybe they can't afford your suggestion. Do you have any idea how much it costs to move across the US? I've done it a few times and I can assure you that it's not cheap.
-
Please do not encourage people to leave the cities. I don't want neighbors.
-
-
Two if you're a millennial.
-
-
Time to short RealPage.
70 comments
And immediate consequences will result for the violators I assume?
I just read the joint legal brief, and, I have to say up front that I am not remotely a lawyer… but the document specifies how and where to identify price fixing, and that motions to dismiss those charges are to be dismissed.
So it doesn't dictate the penalties for price fixing (I assume that's on a trial by trial basis—but again, not a lawyer), but it makes it impossible(?) to ignore, and suggests that (to me), users of 'RENTMaximizer' will be in the crosshairs… while not actually stating that.
Thanks, friend. My optimism has increased by 3-5%. It now sits at 3-5%. (Seriously, thanks though. That's some quality researching)
Does penalties in this case also mean compensation of the renters, whose wealth has been potentially robbed through illegal practices?
The AZ Attorney General seems to be working on it at least.
https://www.azag.gov/press-release/attorney-general-mayes-sues-realpage-and-residential-landlords-illegal-price-fixing
Lots of people act like justice never comes from the Federal government to corporations, as if FaceBook isn't paying Billions in FTC fines for the next 2 decades. Punishments get dolled out all the time, but nobody talks about it.
That type of direct agreement is not necessary to prove collusion (makes it easier to prosecute certainly) but intent doesn't matter legally. Using a software that has an inbuilt collusion algorithm is still collusion. This is also on a larger scale than mom+pop these algorithms and software were/are used by much larger companies that own magnitudes more units.
Their stance is "if it's illegal for a person to do it, it's illegal for an algorithm to do it"
If you use a 3rd party to collude, that's still collusion. Here, that algorithm is the third party
The joint legal brief clarifies that it is indeed collusion. And continues to explain how this is a technological evolution of the handshake.
Interesting. To my non-lawyer mind, use of these types of algorithms is collusion by definition.
Sorry, no.