Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The friends, family, neighbors, or whoever cared about your neighbor would deal with it. If they have a DRO for example, they have the DRO investigate you or talk to your DRO to lock your account until you clear your name. If you don't have a DRO, then no need for that. Just put you on the list as a suspected murderer. DROs don't even have to be involved...it just comes down to ostracizing people who aren't being peaceful or cooperative in your society. It's VERY powerful to isolate someone and force them to fend for themselves. They need others to survive, or at least to have any quality of life. But if they attack you or others in the community, you can always use force in self-defense, as it is now. You just have to prove to others that your violence was justified, again, as it is now.
A. Your DRO's are government. They just govern whomever pays them.
B. You still haven't come up with a good explanation for your "lists". If someone can just be put on the list for some infraction, I could put you on the list for something I made up. After all, it's not like your lists are impartially maintained. He who has money can pay the DRO to look the other way while he puts all his enemies on the "list" for whatever imaginary infractions he can muster.
C. Some people could care less about being isolated. You've heard of hermits, haven't you.
D. Who do you have to prove to that your violence was justified? I don't think you can actually envision this society you are postulating, without any government.
They care about their own customers' need to interact with others who don't have the same company. If I have a Sprint plan and my friend has a Verizon plan, but they don't allow us to talk to each other, what good is that? It's just easier, and they have to please their customers to stay in business. Luckily this already happens, so I don't even have to explain every detail about how it could happen...it already does.
Alright, my mistake. I think you see what I'm getting at though. If there is a need to be filled, that's motivation to innovate.
No, they don't care about their own customers' need to interact with others. Think XBox and PlayStation. Why would your DRO's be different than Sony? They care about PROFITS. It wasn't that long ago that Verizon charged you extra to talk to Sprint customers. They changed their models because start-ups with throwaway phones were piggybacking buying space on the different networks and not charging their customers for talking to other network's customers. And those start-ups could do that because government rules didn't allow the networks monopolies. If the government rules (read FCC) didn't exist, Sprint customers (you) would still be paying more to talk to Verizon customers.
Apparently you are not an investor. If you were you would know the deregulation and break up of Ma Bell was a huge windfall for owners of the stock. Meanwhile now the people are paying $100+ for phone service.
Apparently you are not an investor. If you were you would know the deregulation and break up of Ma Bell was a huge windfall for owners of the stock. Meanwhile now the people are paying $100+ for phone service.
Yes, that was an outcome. But What Was The Reason For The Break-up? Hint: something to do with monopolies?????
Originally Posted by jimhcom Apparently you are not an investor. If you were you would know the deregulation and break up of Ma Bell was a huge windfall for owners of the stock. Meanwhile now the people are paying $100+ for phone service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
Yes, that was an outcome. But What Was The Reason For The Break-up? Hint: something to do with monopolies?????
The guy is so busy trying to rip you apart, he forgot to actually answer the question. It was all about monopolizing an entire industry. It's absurd to believe MaBell wouldn't have the monthly phone bill well above what it is now. No competition breeds "what the market will bear" pricing.
Originally Posted by jimhcom Apparently you are not an investor. If you were you would know the deregulation and break up of Ma Bell was a huge windfall for owners of the stock. Meanwhile now the people are paying $100+ for phone service.
The guy is so busy trying to rip you apart, he forgot to actually answer the question. It was all about monopolizing an entire industry. It's absurd to believe MaBell wouldn't have the monthly phone bill well above what it is now. No competition breeds "what the market will bear" pricing.
No competition creates "what we tell you to pay" pricing. Look at the diamond industry, those rocks are worthless except for the fact that they are controlled by a monopoly.
When a Buffet goes around buying up public utilities it isn't because he cares about infrastructure, it's because he can aggregate a dedicated revenue stream, as he did with insurance companies, to 'invest' elsewhere. If he needs help to allay the monopoly stigma, he asks like-minded friends like Paul Allen and such to assist in buying other utilities so as to make it look like a diverse business model in practice not an enforced scheme. Ditto M$, who loves Apple, Inc. giving the PC and tech devices that sparkling luster last decade as the whole market is galvanized which blasts M$ profits and market segment.
Now tell me how much local and national politics do you think those rulers meddle in?
There are modern monopolies. They just don't operate under an observable unified logo. When they do it is via unknown subsidiaries and individual ownership of stock and stocks owned by funds that are controlled by investment groups that answer to whom? Monopolies are just a touch more underground these days and maybe more of a team effort by friends of friends in high places.
And they do buy representation. Obviously. They also spin data to keep it that way and to profit from. When a known proselytizer like Bloomberg donates $1 billion to John Hopkins and personal acolytes are appointed to chair entities like the CDC... why are calculations so difficult to perform when it comes to politics and government control? Moreso, why do people believe that these types actually care about their interests besides getting them to invest in their schemes?
That is governance on the meta-representational level. Those types are the sort government actually serves. The bigger it becomes the more greed it acquires. The parasite overtakes the host to do its bidding, keep it sustained and growing.
Now, how to return government to a size where not everyone with exorbitant riches claim the true benefits of its administration? Well, maybe in Scandinavia, maybe in boutique nations, maybe in places where there is not so much that can be so profitable. Perhaps the better endeavor is to get government to realize they can't run roughshod over the commoners.
Yes, that was an outcome. But What Was The Reason For The Break-up? Hint: something to do with monopolies?????
I just told you, but apparently you get your knowledge of politics from comic books. Do you really think your congressmen and senators write legislation? Most of them know little or nothing about any of the subjects they are paid to vote on.
Legislation is written by corporate lawyers and lobbyists who pay the politicians to adopt it as their own and to vote for what ever they are paid to.
The deregulation of the telephone business was extremely profitable for Ma Bell. They made billions and you are stuck with much higher phone bills. Didn't Washington do a great job of looking out after your interests?
Originally Posted by jimhcom Apparently you are not an investor. If you were you would know the deregulation and break up of Ma Bell was a huge windfall for owners of the stock. Meanwhile now the people are paying $100+ for phone service.
The guy is so busy trying to rip you apart, he forgot to actually answer the question. It was all about monopolizing an entire industry. It's absurd to believe MaBell wouldn't have the monthly phone bill well above what it is now. No competition breeds "what the market will bear" pricing.
This must be the stupid post parade. Do any of you know the difference between a regulated and deregulated industry???????
Utilities used to be regulated by the government to keep costs down for consumers.
Then the corporations bought Washington and paid to have themselves deregulated so that they could make fat profits. If your phone service was still regulated, they would be limited to single digit profit margins and your phone bill would be a fraction of what it is now.
I know, definitely I know. Every single one of my elderly relatives passed away before retirement age and did not live to see the money they paid into social security. If that isn't outrageous to the nth degree, I don't know what is.
Where did the money go? What happens to those fund where as money paid into the insurance, but the people did not live long enough to collect it? I don't know the answer to this, that's why I'm asking the question(s).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
