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 : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles Hughes who wrote (21696)	11/24/1998 12:57:00 AM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Save the condescension for your subordinates. I admit that my post had some barbs of a personal nature, but nothing worse than your "halls of government" comment, which I find, along with a lot of the other things you say, to be condescending towards those points of view you disagree with, including mine on occasion. Nevertheless, please accept my apology, and I'll avoid personal comments if you will. :) Perhaps you would do better if you would address the actual points I made. I guess I just do not understand what you are saying. You seem to me to be all over the place. I guess I'll leave it at that, rather than try to mount any kind of response.

To: Charles Hughes who wrote (21696)	11/24/1998 11:04:00 AM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Original conservative theory says competition is good, big power is bad, thus antitrust can be good. Liberal economic theory says that overwhelming private power is bad, consumer choice is good, therefor[e] antitrust is good. The first thing we can do to try to clear some of the fog from this debate is to get our labels straight. What you call "conservative" is really liberal. What you call "liberal" is really socialistic. Liberal economics and political theory say, basically, that the proper role of government is to create the legal and political institutions which are most conducive to the spontaneous creation of a social and market order, then let the market take care of itself through the free interaction of market participants and the operation of competition. Socialistic economic and political theory says that you plan and regulate the social and market order in order to arrive at an outcome or distribution of wealth that the planner considers fair or just. You only let the market operate freely when you, with your limited capacity to understand, can see clear social benefits to doing so. (Not you, personally, understand, but whoever is in charge of the planning.) (BTW, true conservatives, those who want to restore the past, are often not adverse to using socialistic means to do so.) Antitrust is basically the use of planning and regulation to try to create the conditions of the market or to create a market in which outcomes and the methods of competition are considered by the planners and regulators to be "fair." So, it's sort of a contradiction, and all I can say about the feasibility of its objective is, "Good luck."