Why do you support the right?

[C0ckney]

Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin

Personally I see a government like a doctor - it should do nothing but make sure everything is in good working order. When things go wrong it should be there to correct the problem.

Yes!

"The role of [the British government] is to meander gently down stream, casting out occasional boat hooks to avoid disaster"

Lord Salisbury

[Giancarlo]

Microsoft is NOT a monopoly for the last time.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by Fez


THIS IS NOT A DEBATE, ZE WAS ASKING A QUESTION. Don't interfere with this.

I don't care what people do with their bodies as long as it ain't affecting me. And I am probably one of the most right authoritarian people on this forum.... so please don't say that.

You just contridicted yourself big time. Authoritarians do indeed care what people do with their bodies.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ned
Arguments that Apple and Linux are effective alternatives is simply rearguing the case. Under the facts as know to the lower court, Microsoft is an illegal monopoly. This holding was affirmed on appeal. Microsoft did not take it to the Supreme Court. So, at least on this issue, the case is over.

Actually, Microsoft is not an illegal monopoly. Why do you think it's not being broken up?

The US government has ruled MS a monopoly, which actually isn't illegal in the US. They have told MS not to do certain things anymore and was in the 'punishment' stage, but it'll still be a very legal monopoly.

I simply don't think the government understands. Many people get along fine with Linux and MacOS to run their computers, and it's even totally and completely free to switch to Linux, and yet still they insist there's a monopoly. A monopoly, to me and most economists, is when there's no viable alternative. There are plenty of viable alternatives, but the vast majority of Americans opt to buy MS Windows over Linux or MacOS. Nobody (should be) forcing them to do so. That's why MS hasn't been broken up.

The main problem with the State's case was their reliance on IE "putting Netscape out of business". The problem with this, of course, is Netscape is still around and kicking, there are far more browsers out today than there was when IE was introduced, and browsers are generally free for consumers rather than $50 pieces of software. You can imagine how hard it is to convince a judge that consumers are hurt when MS' actions made a basic product free rather than an additional product.

[Ned]

Asher, From your point of view, it is just fine and dandy for a Japanese company to dump its product into the US market until its US competitor quits, only to then raise price to the monopoly price level, on the grounds that during the time of dumping, the consumer has lower prices.

As to Netscape still being in business, well yes. But it is no longer an independent company, is it?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Fez
Microsoft is NOT a monopoly for the last time.

Of course not Fez. Under US law, "monopoly" is a defined term.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ned
Asher, From your point of view, it is just fine and dandy for a Japanese company to dump its product into the US market until its US competitor quits, only to then raise price to the monopoly price level, on the grounds that during the time of dumping, the consumer has lower prices.

That would be perfectly fine, because the moment that monopoly raises the price level to unacceptable standards someone will make a cheap alternative.

The thing with software is any kid, literally in his parents' garage, can make a competing product. Linux was made by a Finnish(?) university student in his spare time, and today it's used by millions of people worldwide and on some of the most expensive pieces of hardware.

As to Netscape still being in business, well yes. But it is no longer an independent company, is it?

It's part of AOL-TimeWarner.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by nationalist


You just contridicted yourself big time. Authoritarians do indeed care what people do with their bodies.

No I don't contradict myself. Maybe I do care what people do... but what can I do about it? Nothing.

[gorilonblanco]

Originally posted by bigvic


i actually considr myself a radical moderate. it seems to me that intelligent people are right and left wingers. the truth must lie somewhere in the middle. in the us due to the nature of the 2 party system, the polity either is more radicalized, or they come to resemble each other. yeah, greed of small fish is not so injurious to society, but the big guys need some watching and regulating by the government. don't understand how people here get so pissed over big government, yet big business and its abuses don't seem to phase anyone, until their abuses and conciousless greed causes personal pain, like all the recent job losses. like enron - what a bunch of bastards - not just for what they obviously did, but for their hijinx overseas, supported by money besotted american politicians.

in the 60's and 70's, democrats in the us, left wingers when that was in the vogue, promised something for nothing a cornicupia of yummy governmeent services for nothing, no increase in taxes.
we found that to be bull****
now the same thing has appeared from the right wingers - republicans. this time its the big gov bad, no tax good. but the moment someone's kid dies of meat poisoning because there is not enough federal meat inspectors, pow! we're all highly indignant.
more bull****

radical moderate am i

That's what lawsuits are for. And as far as enron goes, if Clinton hadn't lied about the economy his last 2 years in office none of that would have happened. Because the corporations wouldn't have been able to lie either.