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.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (10575)	9/8/1998 1:14:00 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

If you open up a business, under the anti-trust laws, you are a criminal: 1:If you sell your product for more than your competitors, you are guilty of price gouging 2: If you sell your product for less, you are guilty of price cutting. 3: If you sell it at the same price, you are guilty of price fixing. 4: If you say "the hell with it!" and sell a product no one else has, you are a monopolist. This wasn't accidental. It was planned this way.

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (10575)	9/8/1998 2:03:00 AM
From: ed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Well, you are trying to explain what I have been posting on this thread for me , then what can I say!!! I never said if a law is a bad law, then we do not have to obey. The law is to serve the justice for the majority in the society, if the law can not do that , then the law need to be modified, of course, sometimes, the price is high. You probably still remember more than 200 years ago the North America colony fight for the what so called "TEA TAX", then followed with an independent war, and the born of the United States of America. Yes, Legislators passed the anti trust laws and chose not to repeal them, but this did not mean that the law is right. Just like the "TEA TAX" of more than 200 years ago, the British legislatures passed the tax bill, but it did not mean the tax bill is right. I never said or hint the civil enforcement does not count, what I meant is that we are discussing monopoly here on this thread, not a murder case, "Monopoly " is a much more complex cae than murder case, it is comparing apple with orange to compare a case of 'Monopoly" with a case of "Murder". How do you define monopoly ? how did it come to a situation of monopoly , why monopoly is not right under certain market environment, ...etc, all worth a lot of debates. The world is not as simple as your mind is set.

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (10575)	9/8/1998 10:15:00 AM
From: PMS Witch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

"It's complicated" I think it's complicated beyond comprehension of the average person and even most specialists. Take MSFT, operating in 50 U.S. states and several foreign countries. Do you seriously believe that it is humanly possible to be current with the laws in every area MSFT has a presence. It MAY be possible if those laws and regulations didn't change on a daily basis, but they do change, and attempting to keep abreast of all those changes is not humanly possible. In light of this situation, I think it is reasonable to expect MSFT to be operating in violation of some law some where at some time. However, I doubt MSFT is DELIBERATELY breaking laws. Just my thoughts, PW. P.S. Didn't Mark Twain once remark that no man's property is safe while Congress is sitting?