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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (170640)	6/6/2003 12:08:20 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1580032

"Most monopolies are the result of gov't action". How do you figure? The post office, cable franchises and other local exclusive franchises. Parents and copyrights give a company monopolies on particular products. Most monopolies fall in to one of these areas or are otherwise created or helped out by governments. Also governments often restrict competition without outright creating monopolies through restrictive liscensing and other barriers to competition, or through import tariffs and other trade restrictions. How would you know? You haven't ask me why I made that statement. You simply assumed I was wrong. I don't know. I said I doubt it. I didn't say "nonsense", or "that's impossible" or I know that isn't true". I didn't even say that I doubt that you have as much knowledge in this area as I have or even more. I said I doubt you have a lot more. You where the one making the absolute statement. You didn't say "I think I know a bit more about this then you do", or "I belive I have more experience in this area then you". Your question "how do you know?" is a more appropriate response to your original statement, then it is to my response. Yes, but not in the arbitrary way that most conservatives usually recommend. I am more concerned with gov't waste and making it more effective than I am with reducing its size. I can't see how not being interested in reducing its size or at least taking major efforts to keep it from growing in the future can be consistent with believing that it is a necessary evil. As for reducing waste I'm with you on that but its hard to do. Most of the fat is either hidden among the "muscle", or has powerful political protection from politicians, government unions, or some well connected special interest. If we could squeeze out 1% of the most wasteful spending it would save us $20bil a year, but I think the waste would start creeping back and the $20bil would soon be swamped by new spending. That's not a reason to not fight hard against waste, but it is a reason to believe that the fight is not a panacea that can produce more services for less money with only moderate effort, or a major effort done only once. It would require a major continual effort and even then its only a piece of the puzzle. Tim

To: tejek who wrote (170640)	6/6/2003 12:12:58 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1580032

"Most monopolies are the result of gov't action". How do you figure? The post office, cable franchises and other local exclusive franchises. Parents and copyrights give a company monopolies on particular products. Most monopolies fall in to one of these areas or are otherwise created or helped out by governments. Also governments often restrict competition without outright creating monopolies through restrictive liscensing and other barriers to competition, or through import tariffs and other trade restrictions. How would you know? You haven't ask me why I made that statement. You simply assumed I was wrong. I don't know. I said I doubt it. I didn't say "nonsense", or "that's impossible" or I know that isn't true". I didn't even say that I doubt that you have as much knowledge in this area as I have or even more. I said I doubt you have a lot more. You where the one making the absolute statement. You didn't say "I think I know a bit more about this then you do", or "I belive I have more experience in this area then you". Your question "how do you know?" is a more appropriate response to your original statement, then it is to my response. Yes, but not in the arbitrary way that most conservatives usually recommend. I am more concerned with gov't waste and making it more effective than I am with reducing its size. I can't see how not being interested in reducing its size or at least taking major efforts to keep it from growing in the future can be consistent with believing that it is a necessary evil. As for reducing waste I'm with you on that but its hard to do. Most of the fat is either hidden among the "muscle", or has powerful political protection from politicians, government unions, or some well connected special interest. If we could squeeze out 1% of the most wasteful spending it would save us $20bil a year, but I think the waste would start creeping back and the $20bil would soon be swamped by new spending. That's not a reason to not fight hard against waste, but it is a reason to believe that the fight is not a panacea that can produce more services for less money with only moderate effort, or a major effort done only once. It would require a major continual effort and even then its only a piece of the puzzle. Tim