Wooing far-left Democrats to her 2020 presidential campaign, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. has a new proposal to destroy the crown jewels of the U.S. economy. She wants to break up Facebook, Google, and Amazon. It's an idiotic idea for three reasons.

It's disingenuous.

Knowing that her millennial base loves Apple, she leaves Apple off her explicit target list. It's so politically calculating it's funny.

These companies aren't anti-competitive monopolies.

Let's start with the basics: there are a multitude of search websites online varying from Yahoo, to Bing, to Ask, to AOL. But what makes Google successful is the fact that it is seen by consumers as the best service. Consumers use Google even though Google gives preferred status to its own products. But that's not Google's fault, it's a consumer choice.

A similar theme is true of Amazon. Warren says that "Amazon crushes small companies by copying the goods they sell on the Amazon Marketplace and then selling its own branded version." Sorry, senator, that's called free trade. Amazon "crushes" the marketplace because it sells more goods, more cheaply, more efficiently than its competitors. It "crushes" because consumers choose it. Warren's plan would have consumers pay more for products they currently buy at lower prices. Count me out.

But count me in when it comes to the rising competition from big companies like Walmart. That retail giant's invasion of the online space is already paying dividends for consumers in forcing Amazon to be even more competitive.

These companies are massive innovators, job creators, and wealth creators.

Warren says that Amazon, Facebook, and Google snap up too many smaller companies and thus stifle innovation. Untrue.

Why is it that even though their original business models were focused on far more basic consumer services, Amazon now dominates globally in cloud computing, Google now dominates globally in artificial intelligence, and Facebook now dominates globally in social networking and business facilitation?

It's because those companies have invested vast sums of money in great talent and high-risk, high-reward research and development. Warren's plan would obstruct that innovation by taking away that which empowers it: capital.

What of Warren's claim that the big technology firms prevent innovation from smaller competitors? Again, it's untrue. Job creating high-value companies are forming at increasing rates. Smaller technology companies can refuse to sell to or merge with the tech giants if they choose to do so.

Why do smaller companies so often choose to sell or merge? There's a lot of money to be made. But also, more importantly, because these business owners know that they are valued for their innovation as much as their existing product. They know that joining the big giants gives them means to invest more heavily and create new products more actively. Their talents are enabled. Remember, the source of Amazon, Facebook, and Google's success is not creating barriers to market entry or success, but rather in constantly innovating. That's why they buy up smaller companies — to gain their talents and empower their potential.

Ultimately, that speaks to the ultimate problem with this plan: It sounds intelligent and pragmatic, but it's actually just delusional.

But we shouldn't be surprised. History tells us that when Warren takes a stance on regulation it's going to be bad news. Consider Warren's genius banking regulations. They have gutted small community banks that cannot maintain capital reserve requirements under Dodd-Frank. But at least payday lenders are winning.

The best argument against Warren's proposal comes from her very first words in introducing it: "Twenty-five years ago," Warren begins, "Facebook, Google, and Amazon didn’t exist. Now they are among the most valuable and well-known companies in the world. It’s a great story — but also one that highlights why the government must break up monopolies and promote competitive markets."

It's a great story, so let's ruin it. How are these ideas feasible in a globalized economy? The moment President Warren started enacting these plans, Amazon, Google, and Facebook would simply relocate their research, jobs, products, and yes, tax revenues, to a foreign shore. Note that there's a reason these giants are American, not European. Europe, not America, has chosen Warren's way of regulation.

Still, as a conservative, I hope Warren ends up being the Democratic nominee. In this proposal and her broader agenda to gut the military but boost 10-year domestic entitlement spending by trillions of dollars, she'll make the case against herself. Whatever Americans think about President Trump, and I recognize that many despise him, threats posed by China, Russia, and North Korea, and an existing national debt of $22.1 trillion ( the debt matters), suggest that Warren's presidency would-be America's Titanic.