Is that really the roll of government? To put speedbumps on success, no matter how much, still seems inhibitive to progress. I’ll play devils advocate: what if instead of spending all that money on antitrust litigation that plagues our judicial system, Microsoft invested in hiring, R&D, and continues to maintain their #1 spot. Would that have stopped google and their search engine gold mine, or apples iPhone gold mine. No not at all. And capitalism would have still prevailed with less wasted effort on litigation than had the government not interfered.
I believe the only time the government should involve itself in commercial is when safety is a concern
So without Big Government, Steve Jobs would have just called it quits then? Get real! Its the entrepreneurial spirit that drove them to compete and what drives any successful company to compete. There's always a new model private jet coming out next year.
> Its the entrepreneurial spirit that drove them to compete
The iphone had to be better than blackberry to succeed. Blackberry set the bar for success in some way. In the absence of Blackberry Steve Jobs would have invented something like Blackberry.
Big government actually destroys competition and creates monopolies. This "break up companies" using anti-trust or whatever is complete nonsense. The very reason why Monsanto, ATT, Comcast are near monopolistic is because of the government regulations. I bet Zuckerberg will help government draft regulations that will kill competition in early stage and help him grow Facebook bigger.
Naive people generally fall for the lets use government to break large corporations because they do not understand the nature of people. There is so much money at stake here that it will always be easier to buy off politicians that will not allow the corporation to break off. (Just the way Obama helped the banks who should have gone bankrupt). The same people however correctly show distrust of government in matters of war, LGBTQ issues and so on. It is just a paradox.
You absolutely hit the nail on the head. It's the wolves in sheep's clothing pretending to be righteous that can ultimately cause the most harm. They prey on good willing empathetic people to get them emotionally distracted by the slight of hand that takes place when Billions are on the line.
John Locke might have said babies are born with a tabula rasa. But I suspect genetics play a deep roll in our brain chemistry dictating, for example, why we might take offense to something others find funny. But we can't forget that natural selection applies to Humans too and therefore most humans will save themselves first. The genetic instincts we possess align us to a more Hobbsian tone, that we are Nasty, brutish and short.
Nope. You (and most libertarian/capitalist cheerleaders, to be fair) whooshed on a classic scenario: Microsoft has no reason to innovate when they're a monopoly. It gets worse. Startup X (you like startups, right?) has a brilliant idea that they bring to market, only for Microsoft to buy them out and kill the idea. Startup Y has a brilliant idea, but they get smarter, they don't sell, and then Microsoft copies their tech and outcompetes them with their war chest. Then they kill the technology. Startup Z has a brilliant idea, but they get even smarter and never bother bringing it to market because Microsoft will just kill it.
Startup W has a cool product, but Microsoft threatens to raise the price of Windows on any company that pre-installs it. The technology dies in obscurity.
Microsoft wanted to kill of upstart Netscape so they changed the Windows NT license and pricing. NT Workstation became limited by the license to a very small number of clients, regardless of what server software you wanted to run on it.
For more than a handful of clients you were required to purchase a much more expensive server edition which was basically the same, but included IIS, Microsoft's web server. In other words, to legally use Netscape's (or anyone else's) web server on Windows NT, you still had to buy Microsoft's web server.
To the contrary: it happened to _my_ company, with a minor detail that I omitted: what they objected to was having the software preinstalled _and visible on the desktop._ The end result was the same.
Our company sued Microsoft over it. There was a settlement.
You're stretcing that analogy way to thin. Comcast took the strategy of continuing to push hardware cable boxes on people because it made them twice as much revenue as netflix despite netflix's high gains in Q4 2017. Now that they've successfully eleminated net neutrality, it will be fairly easy to slow down or charge netflix more for peering and if they successfully buy up hulu / fox to integrate their own original productions it will give them full vertical integration.
Naw, 5G will finally end the telecom monopoly on the utility poles. Netflix beat blockbuster by being smarter, Microsoft lost its edge in mobile by being complacent. Monopolies in a non-crony version of capitalism are not bad in their own right.
Naw, 5G will finally end the telecom monopoly on the utility poles. Netflix bet blockbuster by being smarter, Microsoft lost its edge in mobile by being complacent. Monopolies in a non-crony version of capitalism are not bad in their own right.
Then how did Netflix dethrone Comcast? Goliath doesn't always win. The person who makes the superior product wins. Apple is almost never first to market with an idea anymore because they simply wait and do it better. New companies with better ideas are constantly upsetting the apple cart. For god sakes take a look at the mighty brick and mortar stores like Macy's, JCPenny, and nostrums once thought invincible. Goliath only wins, in the minds of people like you who think they can't be beaten.
