WHAT SCIFI MOVIE BEST DESCRIBES (OR PREDICTS) THE FUTURE??? - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 04:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dean Roddey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 19,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 68
If you are trying to argue that we'd be better off without limitation of monopolization of markets, even when they are not obtained by illegality, I'd say you are way off beyond what's reasonable. I think that history clearly demonstrates that this is a recipe for disaster over time. In the same way that governments over time tend towards the less than savory when left unchecked, companies do as well, whatever their original intentions. Without competition and oversight, they inevitably over time don't serve the best interests of the society they are part of.

And it's a little weird to hear someone arguing for free markets, which are very Darwinian in nature, without taking into account what happens in nature when such systems are allowed to run their course unchecked. It's not the 'everything achieves a natural balance' type thing many people seem to picture. It's massive die offs and over-consumption of resources and kill or be killed no matter the consequences and so forth. Yeh, over the long term that is a form of 'balance', in the sense that natural selection is unconcerned with what happens in the medium term to individuals. There's no long range planning in such systems either. And there's no way human society is going to accept, or can afford the consequences of, that form of balance.

It is clear beyond question that, left unchecked, all human societies will tend towards a concentration of power and money at the top in their various large scale hierarchies. This has nothing to do with capitalism vs. communism vs. religion vs. whatever, as a practical matter it will happen in them all. It's just the nature of human nature. Enforced competition, even when it is not in the very immediate best interests of consumers or required by any sort of illegality, is best for them in the long term.

Dean Roddey
Chairman/CTO, Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Dean Roddey is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 04:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post

If you are trying to argue that we'd be better off without limitation of monopolization of markets, even when they are not obtained by illegality, I'd say you are way off beyond what's reasonable. I think that history clearly demonstrates that this is a recipe for disaster over time. In the same way that governments over time tend towards the less than savory when left unchecked, companies do as well, whatever their original intentions. Without competition and oversight, they inevitably over time don't serve the best interests of the society they are part of.
Please name a) A company that was able to establish and maintain a monopoly WITHOUT government intervention, and b) Cite the bad effects for consumers (NOT their competitors) of a company dominating the market solely as a result of market activity (note: theft and political influence peddling are not inherently market activities).
Quote:
Enforced competition, even when it is not in the very immediate best interests of consumers or required by any sort of illegality, is best for them in the long term.
I contend that it is government, NOT the free market, that limits competition. I also don't care for the notion that the consumer is supposed to sacrifice his best interest to some company bitter about not being able to measure up.
RobertR is offline  
post #93 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 04:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kilgore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntsville Ontario
Posts: 3,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 174
This was an excellent idea for a thread.

Why is it being hijacked with ultra fascist right wing clap trap?
JSUL likes this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Kilgore is online now  
post #94 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 04:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilgore View Post

This was an excellent idea for a thread.

Why is it being hijacked
It was free of being hijacked by name calling until you showed up.
RobertR is offline  
post #95 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 04:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kilgore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntsville Ontario
Posts: 3,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 174
I just want to see the thread go back to what was intended, and away from the political discussion.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Kilgore is online now  
post #96 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 05:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilgore View Post

I just want to see the thread go back to what was intended, and away from the political discussion.
There are much better ways of requesting that than calling someone a fascist.
RobertR is offline  
post #97 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 05:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
darthrsg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Post America America
Posts: 8,584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 744
This sucks.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Steam: Guts
darthrsg is online now  
post #98 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 05:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MSmith83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Has anyone mentioned Hitler yet? You must respect Godwin's law.
MSmith83 is offline  
post #99 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 05:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Kilgore pretty much went there.
RobertR is offline  
post #100 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 05:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
Louquid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 748
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Idiocracy

Perhaps it isn't a true "Sci-fi" movie, but I feel it's probably the most foretelling.

We're a society bred for consumerism. We're trained from birth to work toward goals laced with material objects, and are constantly reminded that this is the only thing that matters.

Every year the general population is told what "new" products they have to buy. Every year we're presented with more and more garbage television shows, built around drama and sensationalism. We have 24 hour news networks that have ratings directly proportional to the "shock factor" of the stories being reported. We're getting more stupider by the minute..

We're a society breeding stupidity, blind faith, and consumerism. It's only a matter of time before Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho becomes president and we start feeding all plant life with Gatorade and Brawndo.

Louquid is offline  
post #101 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 06:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louquid View Post

Idiocracy

Perhaps it isn't a true "Sci-fi" movie, but I feel it's probably the most foretelling.

We're a society bred for consumerism. We're trained from birth to work toward goals laced with material objects, and are constantly reminded that this is the only thing that matters.

Every year the general population is told what "new" products they have to buy. Every year we're presented with more and more garbage television shows, built around drama and sensationalism. We have 24 hour news networks that have ratings directly proportional to the "shock factor" of the stories being reported. We're getting more stupider by the minute..

We're a society breeding stupidity, blind faith, and consumerism. It's only a matter of time before Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho becomes president and we start feeding all plant life with Gatorade and Brawndo.

That's why we have home theaters and God created John Coltrane.

What people never seem to get IMHO, is we have only two choices in our modern culture - government and corporations. They're both corrupt to the gills. They both behave as all bureaucracies do, which is as a living thing. Survival is paramount, resources need be acquired and guarded, enemies vanquished. Collateral damage will not be televised.

At least with one, we get to fire them on a regular basis. But then we're stuck with a Toquevilleian paradox, or is it Maistreian, no one seems to know.

Eve: I thought I was through getting involved with men who were trouble. Falling in love on a look. I can't look at you.

Mickey: You have perfection about you. Your eyes have music. Your heart's the best part of your body. And when you move, every man, woman and child is forced to watch.
fjames is offline  
post #102 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 06:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Valencia, Ca
Posts: 3,398
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 220 Post(s)
Liked: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilgore View Post

I just want to see the thread go back to what was intended, and away from the political discussion.

Tack is online now  
post #103 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 06:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dean Roddey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 19,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Please name a) A company that was able to establish and maintain a monopoly WITHOUT government intervention, and b) Cite the bad effects for consumers (NOT their competitors) of a company dominating the market solely as a result of market activity (note: theft and political influence peddling are not inherently market activities).

You are setting up a particular situation as though it defines the argument, but it really doesn't. Therefore I don't think your question is valid, for a number of reasons:

1. No one can have a COMPLETE monopoly anyway, even with government backing, since 'illegal' activity is still available to the consumer if he wants it badly enough
2. A 'monopoly' for purposes of this discussion is sufficient dominance that it is practically impossible for a competitor to enter the market successfully, unless they are an even bigger company who can afford to basically buy their way in by losing huge amounts of money.
2b. It doesn't have to be a single company to be a monopoly for the purposes of this discussion, duopolies or whatever else have the same effect. In an unconstrained market, there's nothing stopping companies from setting prices and controlling resources and so forth.
3. It doesn't matter if the monopoly (as defined in #2) lasts forever. If it limits competition for the duration of its existence, it's not a good thing
4. Theft and political influence absolutely are part of a 'free' market, since such a market is not constrained by oversight or limitation on acquisitions or dominance or how they treat or pay their employees. If you look at the history of capitalism, surely you cannot argue that these things didn't play a huge part in extremely dominant companies of the previous two centuries.
5. You are making a somewhat roundabout argument because you argue that only governments can create monopolies, but you challenge to point one out but of course governments also PREVENT monopolies, which is why I can't point to one at this time. Before a company gets to that point, they will be challenged.
6. The benefits lost to consumers are easy to sweep under the rug if you don't want to accept that such dominance is bad, because many of them are only potential. You can't say what else would have become available to consumers if a market were no so dominated that smaller, innovative companies cannot afford to break in. That's the whole point of why competition is encouraged, because the big, dominant companies are great at working with the status quo, but aren't as good as creating new paradigms.
Quote:
I contend that it is government, NOT the free market, that limits competition. I also don't care for the notion that the consumer is supposed to sacrifice his best interest to some company bitter about not being able to measure up.

That's a bogus position. Once a company reaches a particular point, it's not that they destroy existing competitors, which always happens to some degree. It's that it prevents future competitors. The existing competitors, assuming they started off with similar capacity, got their shot and if they couldn't compete, well ok. But future competitors, once the market is more established, have a much larger barrier to entry, and it can be to the extent that no one will finance them to effectively throw themselves against a brick wall.


As an example, though I have nothing against them, Microsoft is a modern one. I don't think it did anything more overtly illegal than is par for the course even under a fairly constrained market. But it managed to become so dominant, that now, 30 years later, there still is not a competitive OS on the market. And before anyone says Android or iOS, those are not OSes as products themselves. They exist solely to sell hardware. Android probably loses Google money, or at best doesn't make much, and iOS is just a cost of selling iWhatevers, and it's a very closed system. They likely wouldn't exist if they had to support themselves as products competing against Windows.

No one has been able to introduce a consumer OS that could compete with them as a product itself. And of course they have wiped out whole potential new potential company markets purely by just including something good enough in Windows. The amount of money it would require to topple them would be so large that the barrier to entry has made it something that no one has been able to do and few would even attempt, so it's a de facto monopoly. I don't think it's illegally created, or created by government support. It's just so dominant a product that no one has been able to compete against it.

IBM was an earlier example in the same field of course. IBM's dominance didn't last forever, partly because they were dinged on the anti-competition front, and neither will MS, but IBM's enormous dominance lasted a very long time, and MS's has as well, and they have prevented competitive products from entering the market. Of course one can just say, well, you are just making up a potential benefit, while those companies provided a great benefit. But of course if some other company had been in a similar situation, we'd not have had IBM or MS's products either.


I'm certainly pro-business, but I have just read too much history to think that organizations, if not artificially limited where profit or power is concerned, will do anything other than what they have always done, which is to concentrate power and profit in smaller and smaller percentages of the population, and lock in their advantages permanently. That's not an anti-business idea, it's just an acceptance of human nature.

Dean Roddey
Chairman/CTO, Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Dean Roddey is online now  
post #104 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 06:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dean Roddey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 19,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Which will be my last comment, since it appears to be disturbing the natives.

Dean Roddey
Chairman/CTO, Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Dean Roddey is online now  
post #105 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 07:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
A 'monopoly' for purposes of this discussion is sufficient dominance that it is practically impossible for a competitor to enter the market successfully, unless they are an even bigger company who can afford to basically buy their way in by losing huge amounts of money.

That’s a bogus claim. It’s government that imposes barriers to market entry, not the market.
Quote:
In an unconstrained market, there's nothing stopping companies from setting prices and controlling resources and so forth.
History doesn’t support such a statement. Prices FELL during the dominance of Standard Oil and Alcoa. If they could dictate prices as you claim, why didn’t they set them much higher?
Quote:
It doesn't matter if the monopoly (as defined in #2) lasts forever.
Of course it matters. Also, you’re contradicting yourself by admitting that new competitors destroy the temporary dominance.
Quote:
Theft and political influence absolutely are part of a 'free' market
This is like saying that corruption is part of government, therefore, there should be no government, or that some married people cheat, therefore there should be no marriages. Also, if you take away the power of politicians to influence business, there would no point in trying to influence them.
Quote:
The benefits lost to consumers are easy to sweep under the rug if you don't want to accept that such dominance is bad, because many of them are only potential.
No matter how you try to spin it, dominant companies like Standard Oil and Alcoa LOWERED prices. Comparing reality to some theoretical “ideal” doesn’t make the reality “bad”. And let's be honest here. Antitrust was never about "protecting the consumer". It's about doing political favors for certain businesses. The irony is that so many people are HAPPY with the idea of propping up uncompetitive companies, even though they never think of themselves as "pro business".
Quote:
Once a company reaches a particular point, it's not that they destroy existing competitors, which always happens to some degree. It's that it prevents future competitors.
Again, history doesn’t match your claims. PLENTY of new competitors sprang up after Standard Oil became dominant (as in 90%), REDUCING its market share.
Quote:
No one has been able to introduce a consumer OS that could compete with them as a product itself.
So there's no Macintosh? Linux? Sorry, I don't think that claim holds water. Also, smart phones and tablets present a SERIOUS problem for Microsoft.
RobertR is offline  
post #106 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 07:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Thanks Tack, you've succeeded in being the guy who first gets me to try one of these things.

70483
darthrsg likes this.

Eve: I thought I was through getting involved with men who were trouble. Falling in love on a look. I can't look at you.

Mickey: You have perfection about you. Your eyes have music. Your heart's the best part of your body. And when you move, every man, woman and child is forced to watch.
fjames is offline  
post #107 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 08:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dean Roddey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 19,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Glad I stopped, it's now gotten to the 'attack every sentence' stage, which is where it gets stupid.

Dean Roddey
Chairman/CTO, Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Dean Roddey is online now  
post #108 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 09:06 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dean Roddey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 19,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 68
BTW, who is the hottest girl with over $1B?

Dean Roddey
Chairman/CTO, Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Dean Roddey is online now  
post #109 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 10:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kilgore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntsville Ontario
Posts: 3,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 174
What was the point of this thread again?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Kilgore is online now  
post #110 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 11:13 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dean Roddey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 19,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 68
There is no thread.

Dean Roddey
Chairman/CTO, Charmed Quark Systems, Ltd


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Dean Roddey is online now  
post #111 of 135 Old 07-02-2013, 11:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked: 816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilgore View Post

What was the point of this thread again?
I am fairly certain it wasn't to provide a playground for someone who insists monopolies = good, govt. = bad. rolleyes.gif

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #112 of 135 Old 07-03-2013, 03:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sound dropouts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilgore View Post

This was an excellent idea for a thread.

Why is it being hijacked with ultra fascist right wing clap trap?

Limited government is now considered fascist?
sound dropouts is offline  
post #113 of 135 Old 07-03-2013, 03:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MSmith83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilgore View Post

What was the point of this thread again?

It was a free seminar in Econ 101 and energy policy, but a moderator must have changed the title. Building up college loan debt is something more people have to avoid these days, so such free discourse is apparently necessary even though this is an audio/video forum catered towards remote control jockeys.
MSmith83 is offline  
post #114 of 135 Old 07-03-2013, 04:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
darthrsg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Post America America
Posts: 8,584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 744
Class of Nuke 'Em High was pretty prescient in it's depiction of the public school system. Detroit IS Robocop.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Steam: Guts
darthrsg is online now  
post #115 of 135 Old 07-03-2013, 04:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
archiguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 18,185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 299 Post(s)
Liked: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSmith83 View Post

It was a free seminar in Econ 101 and energy policy, but a moderator must have changed the title. Building up college loan debt is something more people have to avoid these days, so such free discourse is apparently necessary even though this is an audio/video forum catered towards remote control jockeys.

Except, in this case, one of the professors would be denied tenure for not knowing what the heck he was talking about and twisting history to fit his agenda. (Consumer interests are never served by monopolies. New competitors are prevented from entering the field and price points are artificially imposed regardless of supply and demand. Again - rent the doc Who Killed the Electric Car? to understand the true cost of Standard Oil's meddling in the free market). But prattle on he does. Haven't put anybody on "ignore" for awhile; looks like we have a candidate. rolleyes.gif
archiguy is online now  
post #116 of 135 Old 07-03-2013, 05:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by archiguy View Post

(Consumer interests are never served by monopolies. New competitors are prevented from entering the field and price points are artificially imposed regardless of supply and demand.
Only if the monopoly and price points are dictated by government. The historical facts are this:
Quote:
By 1879, Rockefeller was the consummate so-called “monopolist,” “controlling” some 90 percent of the refining market. According to antitrust theory, when one “controls” nearly an entire market, he can restrict output and force consumers to pay artificially high prices. Yet output had quadrupled from 1870 to 1880. And as for consumer prices, recall that in 1870 kerosene cost twenty-six cents per gallon and was bankrupting much of the industry; by 1880, Standard Oil was phenomenally profitable, and kerosene cost nine cents per gallon.
By the time of the antitrust trial, kerosene cost 6 cents a gallon.
Quote:
in the early 1900s, many more competitors came on the scene, some of whom remain household names: Associated Oil and Gas, Texaco, Gulf, Sun Oil, and Union Oil, to name a few. ../Between 1898 and 1906, Standard’s oil production increased, but its market share of oil production declined from 34 to 11 percent.

Quadrupling output and cutting prices by 77% is very much in the consumer's interest. The (il)logic of antitrust law is that boosting output and cutting prices is "bad" (as in the case of Alcoa Aluminum).
Quote:
someone who insists monopolies = good, govt. = bad.
True monopolies are imposed by government. The free market doesn't sustain them.
RobertR is offline  
post #117 of 135 Old 07-03-2013, 05:55 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
archiguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 18,185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 299 Post(s)
Liked: 634
You keep trying to equate apples and oranges. It wasn't in Rockefeller's initial interest to either restrict output or force consumers to pay high prices. Quite the opposite. His plan was to eliminate any competition from other transportation technologies. The way you do that is to crush them financially when they poke their heads up and get the people hooked on your product. Only the mean ol' government's anti-trust legislation eventually allowed other competitors to enter the marketplace. But by that time, electric car technology and research was dead, nationwide comprehensive passenger rail was dead, and we suffer the consequences of that to this day.
archiguy is online now  
post #118 of 135 Old 07-03-2013, 05:59 AM
Senior Member
 
JSUL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 38
The Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers serials from the '30's had ray guns that would subdue those shot with it.

We have stun guns today.
JSUL is offline  
post #119 of 135 Old 07-03-2013, 06:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
archiguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 18,185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 299 Post(s)
Liked: 634
Dick Tracy's wrist-phone is about to become a reality. And if you open up TV shows to the future-predicting business, you have even more to choose from. Star Trek's communicators were the model for flip cell phones, for example. Although the thought of a peaceful, prosperous, united Earth leading an interplanetary Federation dedicated to freedom and equal rights seems a bit far fetched at this point. Warp drives and transporters seem more likely.
archiguy is online now  
post #120 of 135 Old 07-03-2013, 06:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
It wasn't in Rockefeller's initial interest to either restrict output or force consumers to pay high prices.
Glad to see you acknowledge that. However, you imply that he could somehow “arbitrarily” raise prices to whatever he damn well pleased, when in fact the ONLY way he could maintain his competitive position was to continue to be as price competitive as possible. As I pointed out, the historical facts prove this. Prices continued to fall clear up to the antitrust trial.
Quote:
His plan was to eliminate any competition from other transportation technologies. The way you do that is to crush them financially when they poke their heads up and get the people hooked on your product.
The ONLY way to “eliminate competition” in a free market is to be BETTER at satisfying consumer wants (which you somehow think is “bad”) than the other companies. As I’ve said, antitrust law isn’t about protecting consumers. It’s about protecting inefficient businesses. This is the backwards logic of antitrust legislation. The MORE a company lowers prices, the more evil it is!
Quote:
Only the mean ol' government's anti-trust legislation eventually allowed other competitors to enter the marketplace.

That doesn’t explain why Standard Oil’s share of the refining market fell from 34% to 11% before the S.O. antitrust trial.
RobertR is offline  
Closed Thread Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off