Fight the good fight House Repubs :).

[luckydevil]

Try this link on the issue of monopolies in a capitalist society, Nathaniel Branden is a former protege of Ayn Rand.


http://www.nathanielbranden.net/ess/ton01.html

[gbear]

Sorry, but I ran into an example of a coersive monopoly yesterday without the benefit of government making it so.

Darn Comcast. They are the ONLY cable provider in Baltimore county. It's not that the law requires it to be that way. I called Star power who I had in Montgomery county where they had both comcast and star power. I asked why they weren't in Baltimore too. I miss getting high speed internet and cable for the price I am currently paying for just cable. There answer was that everytime they have tried to offer services in Baltimore county, theyhave to pay comcast fees for use of the lines, and comcast drives up the prices.

What your arguement fails to take into account is the time lag. It says that the moment the monopoly tries to gouge, another company will come along and gouge a little less. That might be true over the long term. Short term, start companies have to seek capital. The more capital it takes to start up, the harder it is to get and the longer it takes to impliment the plans. The first questin asked of them is "Are there any other companies that have tried to do what you are trying to do?" If the answer is yes, the natural follow up is "well, what happened to them?" If the answer is negative... well would you invest?

Now, that significantly delays the entry into an industry. I have no doubt that at some point I will have an option to Comcast. However, until then I get the pleasure of no real options and a $75 cable bill with only HBO.

Also, your article seems to say no price controling/gouging monopolies ever exist without government intervention. Aren't there also cases where a regulated monopoly is better than the no monopoly option which sometimes happens with pure capitalism? Two prime examples: a drug company with a new drug and the electric station.

With the drug company, if there was no government regulation, everybody else would rip off the drug. Why pay the high developement costs if you can't keep the rights to profit for a time?

The electric company example in the article. It says that as soon as a company tries to gouge, copetetion will arrise. However, that means that 2X the start up costs will be passed on to the consumer base. in addition, the consumer base is split. The result is higher bills for the consumer. Why not regulate the price/profits in that case, keep only one company, and lower the consumers' bills? Economies of scale work in that direction too.

So just curious, what's your take when an industry decides to price fix? An oligopoly? Should those too be allowed to gouge? I'll have to think a little bit more on those.

[Tommy-the-Greek]

I don't think there should be a fed income tax. There should be a fed consumption tax. I just think it is the easiest and fairest way to tax the people as a whole. Now at what percentage should all goods and services be taxed is a topic for another thread.

[JackC]

Isn't the entire concept of "child tax credit" a welfare program in itself? The deduction we get for our home loan is a form of welfare too!

Hmmmmm!

[Darth Tater]

Tax deductions are welfare, all tax credits are. This is because the government own my income, I do.

----

A consumption based tax is a rationalist utilitarian's wet dream!

[Golgo-13]

Originally posted by Art
Ding IA.
Why do people who pay no federal income tax get a PENNY of any credit? Why are we taking money from one person and giving it to another? Why aren't people outraged against such a practice? My guess is they simply don't know it exists.

I am BEYOND outraged and have been for a long time. In my mind this is the CENTRAL issue of politics. All of the social issues are distractions in my mind when it comes to this. Bottom f@cking line.....give me my f@cking money that I earned myself!!! If I want to give to charity let it be by my own free will and choice. I'm sick and tired of government mandated charity.

[JackC]

Originally posted by escholz


I am BEYOND outraged and have been for a long time. In my mind this is the CENTRAL issue of politics. All of the social issues are distractions in my mind when it comes to this. Bottom f@cking line.....give me my f@cking money that I earned myself!!! If I want to give to charity let it be by my own free will and choice. I'm sick and tired of government mandated charity.

Why do they have a "credit" for having kids in the first place? Why should those without kids have to give money to those with kids?

If I want to give to other peoples kids let it be by my own free will and choice! I'm sick and tired of government mandated charity!

[Golgo-13]

Originally posted by JackC


Why do they have a "credit" for having kids in the first place? Why should those without kids have to give money to those with kids?

If I want to give to other peoples kids let it be by my own free will and choice! I'm sick and tired of government mandated charity!

Good to see we agree on something.

[luckydevil]

Why do they have a "credit" for having kids in the first place? Why should those without kids have to give money to those with kids?

sarcasm?

[luckydevil]

There is an alternative for Cable its called satellite.

[gbear]

Maybe if I could get the cemetary behind my house to cut down the trees. However, that doesn't look like a very viable option.

It's one of those situations where geography dictates the monopoly.

You're also ignoring the situations where it is in the consumers interest to have a regulated monopoly rather than multiple compnanies in a free market.

[JackC]

Originally posted by luckydevi


sarcasm?

Yes at some level. Tax credits are really the same as welfare in my mind. Not that I'm not if favor of some of them.

[Riggo-toni]

Taxing working families while subsidizing procreation for the poor is Darwinism in reverse. Income is generally linked to education. Well-educated couples reproduce less because the tax burden now requires that both parents work. The uneducated continue breeding more idiots because we ease the financial burdens associated with having more children.
So, ...more idiots enter the world and waste their existence flipping channels between Cowboy games and pro-wrestling. Test scores continue to plummet, and the left convinces us this is because we're not spending enough money on education (even though we already spend about 2.5 times more per pupil than the OECD average). Consequently, the brainwashed masses agree to more tax hikes to increase bloated education budgets, which subsequently decreases the propensity among the successful to procreate. Still fewer smart kids, while imbeciles with the IQ of a cheese sandwich pop up at maternity clinics in record numbers. Pretty soon, the only intelligent people left in the nation congregate together on-line on of all things, a football message board, where they debate socio-economic issues in the Tailgate section - a tight knit community where inbreds with strange names like Kefka and Fraud Smoot Fan are exposed and thrown into exile. Still, even this last group of gifted individuals cannot prolong the inevitable.

Bottom Line: We are creating a nation of morons and are all doomed!

[luckydevil]

Also, your article seems to say no price controling/gouging monopolies ever exist without government intervention

Indeed that is the case. Monopolies, or at least coercive, price-gouging ones, can only be created by government intervention


Now with the issue of Utilities, there is no reason to not have several or more Utility companies competing in one area. There are right now several ways to generate electricity and more coming available all the time. Right now the government bars two Utilities from competing in the same geographic area. The state licences the utility out to the company so this is a government enforced monopoly

[AdmiralWaugh]

It's always refreshing to see groups of people, large groups, defending the fact that their income is theirs and that the income tax is simply a means by which a parasitic government can extract from its hosts. I mean, it's a leech of the worst kind. As CATO Institute often says, "We could do so much better."

We're left to decide between which better: the socialist Republican RX program or the socialist Democrat RX program. And yet, the Republican one clearly provides for more economic benefit, but it still keeps us on the road toward destruction. What are good people to do?

Sometimes I really wonder -- we're just not making ourselves loud enough. We've got to start participating in the process, and I think, sign up with the party that will do the most good. I think that's the Republican Party and it needs some new hands at the helm. I bet we could all do it if we tried.