<<And, the very mergers of the auto manufacturers can be seen as being the antithesis of anti-trust. >>
Mergers only run afoul of anti-trust laws if they tend to create a monopolistic environment. As long as a "market" remains, they can and should be allowed. Since the market is now mostly a global one, it's reasonable to consider international competitors, rather than merely domestic. The fact that our domestic auto companies aren't making money is a clear indication that a monopoly doesn't exist. On Nov 24, 9:13 am, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Anti-trust is pretty much irrelevant. There are more auto choices > than there have ever been." - T > > On a global scale, you are correct in your statement about more > choices, at least compared to the recent past. On a domestic scale, > not so much. And, if one is suggesting that the parts manufacturers > are not into collusion and price fixing this would be a difficult > argument to support. And, the very mergers of the auto manufacturers > can be seen as being the antithesis of anti-trust. In addition, the > auxiliary industry of oil production is mostly cartel run. So, the > notion of anti-trust seems to be quite relevant. > > On Nov 23, 9:10 pm, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > <<Not only do the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, the days of > > anti trust protection are long over. >> > > > Anti-trust is pretty much irrelevant. There are more auto choices > > than there have ever been. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
