From what I've read in the paper and your comment I can see how the incentives and game theory involved would result in a stronger intra-country regulator (EU) that promotes competition and antitrust regulation better than individual national regulators. (Although it's not clear to me how such a regulator would naturally emerge since it would require the voluntary relinquishing of power from the prior political/economic actors. I haven't followed recent European development so there could be some reasonable logic/history for it, though.)

That said, I'm not sure there is much in terms of normative recommendations for the US. It's not like the US will be forming some economic pact with North American or Western nations and creating some ultra EU-like entity. For the US, regulations come with the ebb and flow of political parties or as a response to big market disruptions/crashes.

I appreciate the article link and will try to read it. It's pretty dense and long but does have some data and models it uses to make its claims. The difference between the level of discourse in the paper vs what is being discussed in these comments is stark.

So.. are people commenting here actually able to access and read the journal article? I'm kind of confused as to how any sort of informed conversation/comment can occur without it. Or are people just reading the post title and abstract and going with whatever prior knowledge/biases they have to agree (or disagree) with this? If so, seems kind of suspect for subreddit called science.