charlituna; we could get bogged down into disagreements about the definition of monopoly, but that's a nit to be picked. You're conflating large market share with monopoly. They're not the same, though they are in common parlance. Main issue, which you're agreeing with me on, is that a large market share need not necessarily be bad for consumers.
These terms get thrown around very loosely. Monopolies are not illegal and the law does nothing to prevent them. Abuse of market power is illegal, and this is what the antitrust laws prohibit. By my understanding, mergers do not have much or anything directly to do with antitrust law. Objections can be raised on the basis of what the competitive landscape may look like after the merger, but the complaint is essentially theoretical, since it anticipates what may happen as opposed to the market conditions already in existence.
These terms get thrown around very loosely. Monopolies are not illegal and the law does nothing to prevent them. Abuse of market power is illegal, and this is what the antitrust laws prohibit. By my understanding, mergers do not have much or anything directly to do with antitrust law. Objections can be raised on the basis of what the competitive landscape may look like after the merger, but the complaint is essentially theoretical, since it anticipates what may happen as opposed to the market conditions already in existence.
+++ for truth
My biggest gripe about this whole thing is that in the end it is likely going to be decided by who throws the most money at the politicians. THAT is the true travesty of this whole mess. Welcome to American democracy where every dollar counts.
My biggest gripe about this whole thing is that in the end it is likely going to be decided by who throws the most money at the politicians. THAT is the true travesty of this whole mess. Welcome to American democracy where every dollar counts.
My biggest gripe about this whole thing is that in the end it is likely going to be decided by who throws the most money at the politicians. THAT is the true travesty of this whole mess. Welcome to American democracy where every dollar counts.
Yeah, that's a big part of my comment about how learning economics shifts your anger from companies to government.
Always such mature, reflective and thoughtful commentary available on this site. When is your tenth birthday?
My tenth birthday, is the same day you graduate from KINDERGARTEN.
I guess you work for Sprint, but the truth is no sin, but it does make you uncomfortable, sorry that you picked a loser company to work for, wait a minute that means your a loser, I'm not sorry at all.
Yeah, that's a big part of my comment about how learning economics shifts your anger from companies to government.
Really? Even good old Adam Smith knew that some economic problems don't work out in the marketplace. And it's not like antitrust laws are something new. They weren't created to protect "consumers" either, as I presume you know.
Once again, monopoly is more of a shibboleth than a useful concept. The operative issue is market power, and the abuse thereof to restrain competition.
Comments
Prime example. Apple has a monopoly in the tablet market. Hands down, indisputable.
Maybe indisputable to someone that doesn't understand the meaning of "monopoly"
FYI... being the best and garnering the vast majority of the sales DOES NOT equal a monopoly.
charlituna; we could get bogged down into disagreements about the definition of monopoly, but that's a nit to be picked. You're conflating large market share with monopoly. They're not the same, though they are in common parlance. Main issue, which you're agreeing with me on, is that a large market share need not necessarily be bad for consumers.
These terms get thrown around very loosely. Monopolies are not illegal and the law does nothing to prevent them. Abuse of market power is illegal, and this is what the antitrust laws prohibit. By my understanding, mergers do not have much or anything directly to do with antitrust law. Objections can be raised on the basis of what the competitive landscape may look like after the merger, but the complaint is essentially theoretical, since it anticipates what may happen as opposed to the market conditions already in existence.
These terms get thrown around very loosely. Monopolies are not illegal and the law does nothing to prevent them. Abuse of market power is illegal, and this is what the antitrust laws prohibit. By my understanding, mergers do not have much or anything directly to do with antitrust law. Objections can be raised on the basis of what the competitive landscape may look like after the merger, but the complaint is essentially theoretical, since it anticipates what may happen as opposed to the market conditions already in existence.
+++ for truth
My biggest gripe about this whole thing is that in the end it is likely going to be decided by who throws the most money at the politicians. THAT is the true travesty of this whole mess. Welcome to American democracy where every dollar counts.
+++ for truth
My biggest gripe about this whole thing is that in the end it is likely going to be decided by who throws the most money at the politicians. THAT is the true travesty of this whole mess. Welcome to American democracy where every dollar counts.
Cynic.
+++ for truth
My biggest gripe about this whole thing is that in the end it is likely going to be decided by who throws the most money at the politicians. THAT is the true travesty of this whole mess. Welcome to American democracy where every dollar counts.
Yeah, that's a big part of my comment about how learning economics shifts your anger from companies to government.
Always such mature, reflective and thoughtful commentary available on this site. When is your tenth birthday?
My tenth birthday, is the same day you graduate from KINDERGARTEN.
I guess you work for Sprint, but the truth is no sin, but it does make you uncomfortable, sorry that you picked a loser company to work for, wait a minute that means your a loser, I'm not sorry at all.
Yeah, that's a big part of my comment about how learning economics shifts your anger from companies to government.
Really? Even good old Adam Smith knew that some economic problems don't work out in the marketplace. And it's not like antitrust laws are something new. They weren't created to protect "consumers" either, as I presume you know.
Once again, monopoly is more of a shibboleth than a useful concept. The operative issue is market power, and the abuse thereof to restrain competition.
Always such mature, reflective and thoughtful commentary available on this site. When is your tenth birthday?
There are a lot geniuses here on the AI forums.