[gmc]

posted by quinns commentary

AS you point they apparently have not gotten away with it. I still say the creation of new technology and all that goes with it far out weighs these issues which likely occurred long after Microsoft created the business in the first place.

The point is how much development and progress has microsoft stymied? How many jobs has they cost. Intel are trying to bankrupt AMD what do you think would happen to prices if they have no competition? That is why monopolies or cartels are bad-they bend the market to suit their bottom line and to the detriment of the consumer. They act to prevent innovation and competition. Microsoft aren't getting away with it in the eu, eu, korea and japan but they bleat it is just anti Americanism (completely ignoring the fact that the EU also heavily fined european companies for anti competitive practices as well) and drag things out hoping the rival companies will fail in the meantime. Netscape won their case but by the time they did they were out of business despite having a better product. Microsoft may have helped make the PC commonplace but they've been using their market power to leave people with no choice-try buying a computer without windows-you have top pay a tax to microsoft whether you want to or not, they deliberately design their operating system so it doesn't work with rival software to curb free competition not because they offer the best prioduct. They are bad for business and their practices are anti-capitalist in nature and destroy the free market in computer software.

It's the same with companies that buy up patents to stop someone developing them or tie up rival companies in litigation they know the rival can' afford to either stop their entry or force them out of business-look at dyson for instance, he approached some of the big vacuum cleaner manufacturers and all they saw is they would lose profit on the sale of bags then they tried to pinch his patent and tied him up for years in court to try and stop innovation.

State control isn't good for the economy neither are monoploies and cartels. It's something that should concern you as you are now bailing out car companies that preferred to get legislation changed so they wouldn't have to produce more efficient engines and keep out foreign made cars rather than compete with them. If they had had to compete fairly they might still be competitive.

I am not saying that at all, I am saying that each person defines success in their own way and it is not always nor should it be money. There are many lower income jobs that have more value and contribute more to society than some jobs making big bucks.

Didn't think you were-but should those in lower paid jobs be deprived of healthcare because they can't pay for it. (bear in mind I do not really know how such things work in the states, you hear stories of people going bankrupt and becoming destitute trying to pay hospital bills how true that is i don't really know)

posted by quinns commentary

So you need to have some means of holding politicians and companies to account for what they do and the ability to impose severe enough sanctions on them that they will be forced to behave.

I agree but that never seems to happen

It seems societies go back on forth-you get a culture where corruption and exploitation becomes acceptable then the people get annoyed and pull things the other way for a while then the cycle repeats itself over and over again. There is no one solution imo. A hundred years ago neither of our countries were democracies with universal suffrage and all the freedoms we now take for granted, 150 years ago you still had slavery- so things do progress. With the election of Obama you seem to have stopped what looked like progress towards a fascist state. That a country like the US can elect a black president would have been inconceivable not so long ago. nation talks to nation and people to people (we wouldn't have been doing this ten years ago) that's progress as well.

Actually I could give you countless examples where politicians have been held to account and things changed for the better, lurched backwards and then gone on again. Most of them would be UK based though but just think of things like the civil rights movement and suffrage for women in the states.

Our democracy on the other hand is in deep **** but that will be sorted because the people have had enough, I don't think our politicians grasp the extent of the anger yet.

I've got no time for political panaceas, I like some aspects of socialism but reject it as a complete solution just as outright market capitalism across all aspects of society as touted by the right is not a solution either. Cherry pick the best bits.

I think the more you know-read and study etc the less likely you are to think you have all the answers. When you talk to somebody with strong opinions either of the right or the left you realise they know a lot less than they think they do and sometimes haven't learned to think for themselves and are generally speaking impressed with their own perspicacity and wisdom. Bit like religion-they are right because they know.

Capitalism isn't dead but maybe you need to let socialism flower a bit in the states. A forest with only one plant is not much of forest. (that sounds really profound doesn't it?)

posted by spot

It depends entirely on how you view society. Jesus disagrees with you at an absolutely fundamental level, for example. So do I, for similar reasons.

What you are the son of god?(sorry couldn't resist the temptation)