Let me see if I understand this correctly. You want to ban me bidding on something because it raises the price for when you eventually win it. No thank you.
Say I'm running a town in Colorado. You think Amazon is going to set up in DC. Well, I want a shot at that. Having an Amazon HQ in my town would be wild. It could reverse economic decline and everyone's life would likely improve with the added dollars to the local economy. I want to bid on that and go all the way up to my break even. What if it makes it more valuable to move here? I want the shot at that.
Either you give me the chance to do that or you give me megabucks to not do it. But if you're using the law to compete economically we're probably not correctly using comparative advantage.
If it gets net negative for you at some point, don't bid! Why use the law to stop me from bidding?
Say I'm running a town in Colorado. You think Amazon is going to set up in DC. Well, I want a shot at that. Having an Amazon HQ in my town would be wild. It could reverse economic decline and everyone's life would likely improve with the added dollars to the local economy. I want to bid on that and go all the way up to my break even. What if it makes it more valuable to move here? I want the shot at that.
Either you give me the chance to do that or you give me megabucks to not do it. But if you're using the law to compete economically we're probably not correctly using comparative advantage.
If it gets net negative for you at some point, don't bid! Why use the law to stop me from bidding?