Zanchief wrote:If Microsoft isn't a monopoly then MLB sure as hell isn't. What's with the language? Did you suddenly revert to a caveman because you're unable to present an opinion?
once again you speak out of Ignorance. Look it up. MLB is a government granted monopoly.
But there are a number of competing baseball leagues. If Microsoft isn't a corporation then neither is MLB. Also, how is it not a corporation?
Yeah, but how much of that is because the government enforces anti-monopoly laws?
Think about how rich MS was in the mid-90s and how badly Apple was doing. If there were no anti-monopoly laws, MS had so much cash available that it could (and would) have simply bought Apple lock stock and barrel in a hostile takeover, and killed them off. Then they would have done the same thing to any other startup competitor that looked like it might get anywhere. They COULDN'T though, because of the federal laws against monopolies.
That's the entire point. We don't HAVE monopolies like they did at the start of the 20th century because they're not allowed now.
But in all seriousness, go look at what some of those business moguls did back then. Just look at Rockefeller and Standard Oil, and how they literally controlled every aspect of the oil business, down to who made the barrels, etc. If you wanted to sell kerosene for lamps back in the 1890s, you had no choice in the US BUT to buy it from Standard Oil. Period. Rockefeller was in no way enabled by the government to do what he did, he just went out and did it. Standard oil only got its monopoly broken when the government stepped in and did something about it. See Carnegie and US Steel for another example.
Zanchief wrote:If Microsoft isn't a monopoly then MLB sure as hell isn't. What's with the language? Did you suddenly revert to a caveman because you're unable to present an opinion?
once again you speak out of Ignorance. Look it up. MLB is a government granted monopoly.
But there are a number of competing baseball leagues. If Microsoft isn't a corporation then neither is MLB. Also, how is it not a corporation?
Post the names of the competing baseball leagues. where did anyone say Microsoft isnt a corporation?
Arlos wrote:Yeah, but how much of that is because the government enforces anti-monopoly laws?
Think about how rich MS was in the mid-90s and how badly Apple was doing. If there were no anti-monopoly laws, MS had so much cash available that it could (and would) have simply bought Apple lock stock and barrel in a hostile takeover, and killed them off. Then they would have done the same thing to any other startup competitor that looked like it might get anywhere. They COULDN'T though, because of the federal laws against monopolies.
That's the entire point. We don't HAVE monopolies like they did at the start of the 20th century because they're not allowed now.
But in all seriousness, go look at what some of those business moguls did back then. Just look at Rockefeller and Standard Oil, and how they literally controlled every aspect of the oil business, down to who made the barrels, etc. If you wanted to sell kerosene for lamps back in the 1890s, you had no choice in the US BUT to buy it from Standard Oil. Period. Rockefeller was in no way enabled by the government to do what he did, he just went out and did it. Standard oil only got its monopoly broken when the government stepped in and did something about it. See Carnegie and US Steel for another example.
-Arlos
apple might have been doing badly but they did hold a market share. right? and I will give you standard oil, thou Rockafeller broke several state laws in forming this.
Yeah they did have a market share, but they wouldn't have if this were a completely free-market economy. MS would have just bought them lock stock and barrel. They had more than enough cash in the bank to buy Apple at double the price it was listed at on the stock exchange and still had several billions in reserve. Given how aggressive MS has always been in securing its lines of business, they *WOULD* have made that purchase, and then no one but MS would have had any market share.
The only thing that stopped them, the ONLY thing, is that there are anti-monopoly laws now, unlike when Standard Oil got formed. If not for those laws, they would have been an absolutely monopoly in every way. You only have your government to thank for the fact that they COULDN'T.
Tikker wrote:you may want to check into that again evermore~
it's weird that since the early 1990's your government has considered them a monopoly
here, i'll even google it for you
Legally, a monopoly or "trust" exists when an individual or firm can explicitly force competitors out of business by slashing prices, buying up and hoarding supplies, bribery or intimidation (Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914).
there is a difference between a monopoly and being monopolistic
Arlos wrote:Yeah they did have a market share, but they wouldn't have if this were a completely free-market economy. MS would have just bought them lock stock and barrel. They had more than enough cash in the bank to buy Apple at double the price it was listed at on the stock exchange and still had several billions in reserve. Given how aggressive MS has always been in securing its lines of business, they *WOULD* have made that purchase, and then no one but MS would have had any market share.
The only thing that stopped them, the ONLY thing, is that there are anti-monopoly laws now, unlike when Standard Oil got formed. If not for those laws, they would have been an absolutely monopoly in every way. You only have your government to thank for the fact that they COULDN'T.
-Arlos
and what would have happened if no one bought their products and purchased OS/2 instead?
Evermore wrote:I find if interesting you are so opinionated on subjects that have no effect on you what so ever.
Stupid people upset me, no matter where they live. State laws, federal laws, what's the fucking difference to you?
You must hate yourself then.
You are Canadian and would have no idea what the difference is. You talk like you are some damn expert on everything and in truth have no fucking clue what so ever. I swear you just open your mouth just to start arguements so someone pays attention to you. 95% of your arguements are pathetic attempts at twisting around what is being said to try and use someone's words against them. Dude you arent any good at it. What even pisses me off even more is you act like you are holier then thou and you opinion is the only one that matters.
From here on out I am not even going to respond to you. Get your attention from someone else.
IBM had dropped OS/2 by then. It didn't exist. Besides which, MS could easily have bought up companies like WordPerfect and owned the applications market too. They could and would have been able to drive any competitors out of business, if they didn't buy them first.
I repeat: The only thing that prevented Microsoft from becoming a true monopoly in all aspects was the federal government, and the fact that there were laws that prevented them from becoming one.
Evermore wrote:From here on out I am not even going to respond to you. Get your attention from someone else.
Evermore wrote:HAHAHAHAHAHAH yea semi pro teams are in competition thats good
You lasted two minutes. Congratulations.
The reason you find my arguments deceptive is because I actually have some, where as you just scream obscenities and peddle some line you read off a Ron Paul news letter and assume we won't know the difference.
Evermore wrote:From here on out I am not even going to respond to you. Get your attention from someone else.
Evermore wrote:HAHAHAHAHAHAH yea semi pro teams are in competition thats good
You lasted two minutes. Congratulations.
The reason you find my arguments deceptive is because I actually have some, where as you just scream obscenities and peddle some line you read off a Ron Paul news letter and assume we won't know the difference.
While I may not agree with Zan on all things and I certainly agree with Evermore even less, I do see that Evermore is quicker to resort to namecalling and swearing than he is to pose an arguement. He seems like the type of guy to talk louder when he's arguing to try and get his point across. Just an observation.
leah wrote:i am forever grateful to my gym teacher for drilling that skill into me during drivers' ed
leah wrote:isn't the only difference the length? i feel like it would take too long to smoke something that long, ha.
I rarely agree with either of them really, but like you said Jay, I think in this one Evermore doesnt have any responses to him but stuff like no you answer me first assfuck! Ron Paul for lyfe!
Arlos wrote:Yeah they did have a market share, but they wouldn't have if this were a completely free-market economy. MS would have just bought them lock stock and barrel. They had more than enough cash in the bank to buy Apple at double the price it was listed at on the stock exchange and still had several billions in reserve. Given how aggressive MS has always been in securing its lines of business, they *WOULD* have made that purchase, and then no one but MS would have had any market share.
The only thing that stopped them, the ONLY thing, is that there are anti-monopoly laws now, unlike when Standard Oil got formed. If not for those laws, they would have been an absolutely monopoly in every way. You only have your government to thank for the fact that they COULDN'T.
-Arlos
i'd just like to point out that a couple years ago, before the wii came out, microsoft went across the highway to nintendo and said "here is an ungodly amount of money. can we own your company?"
rofl wth where did you come from, i haven't seen a post from you in like 2 years
"I think you may be confusing government running amok with government doing stuff you don't like. See, you're in the minority now. It's supposed to taste like a shit taco." - Jon Stewart
