4 ms·
so if you do something good, you should be permitted some amount of illegal behavior? If you're a priest, perhaps you would be permitted 1 murder, in exchange f
by rgbrenner 10y ago
so if you do something good, you should be permitted some amount of illegal behavior? If you're a priest, perhaps you would be permitted 1 murder, in exchange for your good behavior over the years?
Is that what you're saying?
- karajima 10y agoWell, if that 'murder' was an execution of a convicted criminal. Why not?
- nickik 9y agoBeing a monopolist is not illigal. Also in the US Anti-Trust cases need to probe harm to consumer. This is not the progressive area where you can just use Anti-Trust law against any company you don't like.
- rgbrenner 9y ago3rd sentence from the parent I was replying to: "Let's assume the worst of Google and conclude they abused their search monopoly."
- panabee 9y agoexcellent straw man. :) killing a person and killing a competitor are very different. if they were identical, jeff bezos would be serving 1000 life terms. :) the desire to dissolve monopolies is based on frameworks defined decades ago. the question is whether these frameworks are as applicable today -- and in particular to software companies like google that do not charge consumers (with money). perhaps these old frameworks remain applicable, but it's difficult to consider their conclusions valid if they are biased to only see harm. that would be like saying cars and airplanes are terrible because they ruined the railroad industry. to reiterate, maybe society is worse off with monopolies. but one cannot credibly make this assertion without considering both the costs and benefits.