All of which supports my point. Anti-trust legislation is intended to foster competition within a market. The auto industry is very competitive.
On Nov 24, 5:14 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For those who are not conversant with the notion of anti-trust: > > "Competition law, known in the United States as antitrust law, has > three main elements: > �h prohibiting agreements or practices that restrict free trading and > competition between business entities. This includes in particular the > repression of cartels. > �h banning abusive behaviour by a firm dominating a market, or anti- > competitive practices that tend to lead to such a dominant position. > Practices controlled in this way may include predatory pricing, tying, > price gouging, refusal to deal, and many others. > �h supervising the mergers and acquisitions of large corporations, > including some joint ventures. Transactions that are considered to > threaten the competitive process can be prohibited altogether, or > approved subject to "remedies" such as an obligation to divest part of > the merged business or to offer licences or access to facilities to > enable other businesses to continue competing....." > > For the rest of this simple overview, > see:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-trust > > On Nov 24, 12:08 pm, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > <<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.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
