Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Exactly. Thus the question.... should we allow corporations that hold large market shares, like microsoft, and apple,... to have closed proprietary architectures.
Splitting up monopolies, and anti-monopoly regulation is a necessary part of all free market systems. As for your nazi card... lol you loose biatch.Exactly. Thus the question.... should we allow corporations that hold large market shares, like microsoft, and apple,... to have closed proprietary architectures.
allow?? in a free country you don't create a lib Nazi gestapo to prevent free people from making, selling, and buying what they want. If you have something against Apple don't buy their stuff and persuade others to do the same, but don't turn to liberal violence. Violence is always the liberal way.
This is a pretty concise high level talk about the "Free Market".
Yes, it is. What do you suppose he's high on exactly?
Knowledge.
You should try some.
Splitting up monopolies, and anti-monopoly regulation is a necessary part of all free market systems. .
This is a pretty concise high level talk about the "Free Market".
Yes, it is. What do you suppose he's high on exactly?
Power, mostly. Putting government in charge of our economic decisions will be worse than letting them control religion.
Splitting up monopolies, and anti-monopoly regulation is a necessary part of all free market systems. .
dear, its almost impossible to get a monopoly under capitalism let alone a bad monopoly which of course explains why there are no examples despite 40 million companies in America . You were brainwashed by Marx but don't know it. Come on give us all the example????
dear, its almost impossible to get a monopoly under capitalism let alone a bad monopoly which of course explains why there are no examples despite 40 million companies in America . You were brainwashed by Marx but don't know it.Splitting up monopolies, and anti-monopoly regulation is a necessary part of all free market systems. .
dear, its almost impossible to get a monopoly under capitalism let alone a bad monopoly which of course explains why there are no examples despite 40 million companies in America . You were brainwashed by Marx but don't know it. Come on give us all the example????
What?
Are you serious?
A History Of U.S. Monopolies
This is a pretty concise high level talk about the "Free Market".
Yes, it is. What do you suppose he's high on exactly?
Power, mostly. Putting government in charge of our economic decisions will be worse than letting them control religion.
the power to regulate commerce is clearly delegated in our federal Constitution
This is a pretty concise high level talk about the "Free Market".
Yes, it is. What do you suppose he's high on exactly?
Power, mostly. Putting government in charge of our economic decisions will be worse than letting them control religion.
the power to regulate commerce is clearly delegated in our federal Constitution
interstate commerce, not "the economy"
And it seems you don't understand the scope of legislative powers, pertinent to the economy..
This is what the Constitution actually provides:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
Article I | Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
All of that is germane when dealing with the economy.
progressUnder capitalism the govt in[sic] not involved in business...
Really?
Says who?
dear, under socialism, crony capitalism, and crony socialism govt is heavily involved in business, under capitalism there is little involvement.
Do you have the IQ to understand?
Special Ed has gone from 'no involvement' to 'little involvement'
It's a miracle! Hallelujah!
as always Dantee, a typical liberal, lacks IQ for substance. Ever see a conservative afraid of a debate. What does that teach you?? A liberal is foul and violent and he is right and has no need to debate.
This is a pretty concise high level talk about the "Free Market".
Yes, it is. What do you suppose he's high on exactly?
Power, mostly. Putting government in charge of our economic decisions will be worse than letting them control religion.
the power to regulate commerce is clearly delegated in our federal Constitution
interstate commerce, not "the economy"
Well yeah, it is.
This is a pretty concise high level talk about the "Free Market".
Yes, it is. What do you suppose he's high on exactly?
Power, mostly. Putting government in charge of our economic decisions will be worse than letting them control religion.
the power to regulate commerce is clearly delegated in our federal Constitution
interstate commerce, not "the economy"
Ever see a conservative afraid of a debate.
You. Tell me about the Fed. LOL!
Ever see a conservative afraid of a debate.
You. Tell me about the Fed. LOL!
You call shouting and character assassination debate?
This is a pretty concise high level talk about the "Free Market".
Yes, it is. What do you suppose he's high on exactly?
Power, mostly. Putting government in charge of our economic decisions will be worse than letting them control religion.
the power to regulate commerce is clearly delegated in our federal Constitution
interstate commerce, not "the economy"
dear, Commerce among the several United States is the economy.
And it seems you don't understand the scope of legislative powers, pertinent to the economy..
This is what the Constitution actually provides:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
Article I | Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
All of that is germane when dealing with the economy.
Quoting the Constitution is fine, but it all comes down to the values and ambitions of those interpreting it. If you want the commerce clause to mean that government has unlimited power to dictate our economic decisions, and you can get Congress and the Court to agree with you, then that's what it means.
The real question is, what do we want it to mean, and why?
And it seems you don't understand the scope of legislative powers, pertinent to the economy..
This is what the Constitution actually provides:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
Article I | Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
All of that is germane when dealing with the economy.
Quoting the Constitution is fine, but it all comes down to the values and ambitions of those interpreting it. If you want the commerce clause to mean that government has unlimited power to dictate our economic decisions, and you can get Congress and the Court to agree with you, then that's what it means.
The real question is, what do we want it to mean, and why?
There's ALOT more than just the "commerce clause" in the sections I just posted.
It's in English as well.
