Teddy Roosevelt was the Trust Buster -

[kovert]

Originally Posted by kovert

Where's a Roosevelt when you need him?

Oh Teddy, where art thou?

"As HuffPost first reported last week, BP, Transocean and other members of the oil industry vigorously objected to new safety regulations proposed by MMS last summer, which would have required them to submit their safety and environmental management programs to an audit every three years.

The industry's objections extended to measures intended to help clean up after an oil spill. Claiming that the petroleum industry had funded the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to $1 billion, the American Petroleum Institute wrote a 2000 letter to the Department of Transportatino, stating:"

[kovert]

Never a Roosevelt around when ya' need 'em.

"Occasionally people say that the story we tell in 13 Bankers is really the same in every industry. That would not surprise me. I do think that the financial sector is unusual for a couple of reasons. One is that the interconnections between the major financial institutions make each one too big to fail in a way that, say, Enron was not. Another is that modern finance is so complex that it makes it easier for industry lobbyists to run roughshod over congressional opponents. But the problem of regulatory capture is obviously not restricted to finance, and it is a problem that we are seeing all over."

[kovert]

Originally Posted by kovert

Here is the
video version of the above article for those interested.

This article follows up on the previous theme.

"Hundreds of thousands of groundbreaking innovations are sitting on the shelf literally waiting to be examined," David Kappos, Director of the USPTO, told an audience at a biotechnology conference earlier this year.

"[This results in] jobs not being created, life-saving drugs not going to the marketplace, companies not being funded, businesses not being formed," Kappos added.

And while many say patents spur entrepreneurship because they give inventors a stronger incentive to invent, and offer venture capitalists more reason to open their wallets -- others disagree entirely.


Patents, they argue, do not increase incentives to invent, and are not vital to startups getting financing. In fact, they can harm innovation because they breed intellectual property battles that stall billion-dollar innovations over patents worth far less. Often these legal battles are between large technology firms and so-called "patent trolls" -- firms that buy up patents with the sole intention of shaking down large companies that allegedly infringe on them. As the Economist notes, a group recently found that these types of cases have risen from 109 in 2001 to 470 in 2009.

As the flood of patent-marking lawsuits continues to flow, and the debate spills into Congress, legislation to fix America's broken patent system remains tied up in the Senate."

[kovert]

Originally Posted by kovert

This article follows up on the previous theme.

"Hundreds of thousands of groundbreaking innovations are sitting on the shelf literally waiting to be examined," David Kappos, Director of the USPTO, told an audience at a biotechnology conference earlier this year.

"[This results in] jobs not being created, life-saving drugs not going to the marketplace, companies not being funded, businesses not being formed," Kappos added.

And while many say patents spur entrepreneurship because they give inventors a stronger incentive to invent, and offer venture capitalists more reason to open their wallets -- others disagree entirely.


Patents, they argue, do not increase incentives to invent, and are not vital to startups getting financing. In fact, they can harm innovation because they breed intellectual property battles that stall billion-dollar innovations over patents worth far less. Often these legal battles are between large technology firms and so-called "patent trolls" -- firms that buy up patents with the sole intention of shaking down large companies that allegedly infringe on them. As the Economist notes, a group recently found that these types of cases have risen from 109 in 2001 to 470 in 2009.

As the flood of patent-marking lawsuits continues to flow, and the debate spills into Congress, legislation to fix America's broken patent system remains tied up in the Senate."

The latest (http://zocalopublicsquare.org/fullVideo.php?event_year=2010&event_id=414&video=& page=1 - broken link) from Barry.

Originally Posted by kovert

Again its not how irate, rabid, pseudo progressives/conservatives do their best to distort the debate by framing it as an either/or choice between private corporate versus public government domination.

Its about finding a balance that WAS THERE but has been lost over the past 30 years. The real debate should be about how can we get the yin and yang of the public and private sectors to work in the benefit of the American middle income and working populations ALONG with our wealthy.

Enjoy.

“The real story of the first Tea Party was about people rising up against monopoly,” said Lynn, a New America Foundation fellow and author of Cornered: The New Monopoly Capitalism and the Economics of Destruction. “American was born out of many rebellions against monopolies.”

The early republic, Lynn noted, rejected monopolies of church, land, and commerce. For two centuries the country fought and established laws against monopolies, preventing private government and the concentration of economic and political power.

But as Lynn explained to the crowd at The Actors’ Gang in Culver City, in the last three decades, antimonopoly laws have been rolled back to such an extent that most every industry is dominated by one or a few companies — leaving their employees, their consumers, and their producers with little freedom and a lot of fear.”

[rocksy23]

Great discussion. Speaking of Teddy Roosevelt, here's a good article that discusses little-known facts about the 26th President: 18 Things You Didn't Know About Teddy Roosevelt