Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: donald sew who wrote (32953)	11/9/1999 1:35:00 PM
From: Robert Rose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

Donald, your post is simply one more example of how our system works. As is the msft example. msft has delivered an incredible product, we have benefited, and we are reigning in the concommitant excesses. LONG LIVE THE AMERICAN WAY! ps. Did I say that? Yea, I guess I did. :)

To: donald sew who wrote (32953)	11/9/1999 2:30:00 PM
From: Merritt	Respond to of 99985

Donald: <<. So since the steamship industry was such a wonderful and powerful tool, does that mean that that the customers should continue paying 6000-7000 per container when they can and should only pay 3000. Hey to many, the higher price was a bargain also.>> While it's true the merchant marine industry took full advantage of their anti-trust exemption status, and probably more than they should have, it was the transport of military personnel and materials that earned them that status. The government didn't provide proper oversight of the industry, and both shipping rates, and wages, were allowed to get out of kilter...but that was a maladministration problem, not a strategic one. This maladministration continues with the government de-emphasizing the strategic importance of a strong merchant marine, IMHO.