The Justice Department Blocked AT&T from Gobbling up T-Mobile

[Cecilie1200]

AT&T has one of the worst customer service rating in US, where as T-Mobile has one of the best. As a T-Mobile customer, I want T-Moble to be T-Mobile.
Also, in a capitalistic economy, competition is good and favors the consumer.

In a capitalistic economy, the capitalism ensures competition, not the government. And there certainly IS competition. Just because AT&T merges with T-Mobile doesn't mean they get to just relax and do whatever they want.

Their history as far as customer service shows they have been relaxing already.
I just renewed with T-Mobile, but as I'm always a good shopper and love to look up stuff, I did some heavy research. There were alot of negatives about AT&T, the best thing that they have got going is their sheer size.
Also the MORE competition, the better it is for the customer. As a former buyer for a large entity, I found the more choices I had for my dollars the better the prices and customer service I got. It's a no-brainer. And you, as a consumer benefit from wide open competition.

I hate to break it to you, Sparky, but your personal experience with and opinion of AT&T's customer service is NOT the universal objective standard by which all citizens of the US will now be judging. While I do not currently have a contract with AT&T, I did for many years, and was always quite pleased and satisfied with their customer service. I switched to T-Mobile for a better price when my teenager became old enough to need a phone, and have actually been not quite as happy, although certainly not UNhappy, with their customer service.

Also, while competition is good for consumers, that really only applies to NATURAL competition, arising from free market forces, not forced competition generated and manipulated by government intervention. This merger would not mean that there was no longer competition in the wireless market, nor would it prevent some newcomer from arising and biting AT&T's butt if they're ever dumb enough to start resting on their laurels.

I'm not saying I'm for or against the merger. I'm saying the free market doesn't require government interference, manipulation, and micro-management.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well, I was with At&T left to go with Cingular and guess what happened? At&T merged with them...Now they want to merge with T-mobile. I dont see At&T doing the "right thing" because capitalism isnt about the right thing its about making money.

Yes, and one makes money by pissing customers off and making them hostile. Brilliant economic theory.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Fucking Awesome. Someone has to stop At&T and their wanted monopoly.

T-Mobile users rejoice at Justice Dept. blocking AT&T merger - CNN.com

Monopoly? Puhleeze. As I understand it, T-Mobile is the #4 wireless provider, and AT&T is #2. For those of us who can count, that means there's a #1 and a #3, at least. Hardly a monopoly, and hardly likely to allow a merged company to start hiking prices and blowing off the need for technological advances.

And that's completely leaving aside the fact that there's no way to HAVE a monopoly in a market like the US without government intervention.

First of all, it's quite easy to have a monopoly in certain industries without government intervention. They're not called natural monopolies for their nice green color.

Second, it's The Sherman Anti-Trust act, not the Sherman Anti-Monopoly act. A business doesn't have to be a monopoly to run afoul of the law.

Could you vague that up for us a little? I can almost get a grip on one tiny corner of a substantial fact there. Not quite, but almost, and we wouldn't want THAT to happen.

 

[uscitizen]

Fucking Awesome. Someone has to stop At&T and their wanted monopoly.

T-Mobile users rejoice at Justice Dept. blocking AT&T merger - CNN.com

But in the Justice Department's eyes -- and anecdotally those of T-Mobile's customer base as well -- the costs of the merger may outweigh the benefits. "The combination of AT&T and T-Mobile would result in tens of millions of consumers all across the United States facing higher prices, fewer choices and lower quality products for mobile wireless services," said deputy attorney general James M. Cole in the Justice filing.

CLAP YOUR HANDS AS MUCH AS YOU WANT TOO--BECAUSE AT& T promised they would bring BACK TO THE U.S. OVER 100,000 freaking JOBS BACK TO THE U.S.-

And prior to that you freakin LIBERAL MORONS--your freaking President Bill Clinton took apart MICRO-SOFT corporation which lead to the collapse of the tech sector in 2000 you freaking DUMB-ASSE'S


Don't complain to me about outsourcing and sending JOBS overseas--YOU FREAKING MORONS.

No more Y2K freakout was what caused the tech bubble to burst.
And the main cause of the tech bubble as well.

 

[Cecilie1200]

you always this stupid?

Scroll through her posts if you want a solid laugh. She's a real classy lady.

oh i know, iwas going for the joke.

I for one would really appreciate it if you DIDN'T get naked right now.

See if you can give us all a laugh by actually saying something meaningful, rather than just "You disagree with me. You're stupid."

 

[Cecilie1200]

They all piggy back off of each other. Or did you think coast to coast coverage was magical?

The sheer logic failure in this thread is as astounding as the lefts sudden willingness to lose jobs just to spite ATT. Very telling...........

and punt...Good job..

There is no punt. ITS QUITE CLEAR THAT MANY ON THE LEFT DONT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT JOBS IF IT GETS IN THE WAY ON INTERFERING WITH A LARGE COMPANY.

Seriously thats the only concern im seeing in this thread. ATT this ATT that, not one mention of the 10's of thousands of jobs that will be lost if this merger isnt approved. Yet in the very next thread you will scream WHERE ARE THE JOBS JOBS JOBS you cant fucking have it both ways

You're being accused of "punting" by someone who hasn't had anything to say except "You're stupid" this whole time.

Can't imagine what made you think he had a single brain cell engaged on this subject.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why does Grampa thinks that AT&T will save the day? Oh yeah, because AT&T said so

Maybe because T-Mobile thinks so. What have YOU offered to refute it, other than "Well, I don't personally like them, so that means they suck universally"?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why does Grampa thinks that AT&T will save the day? Oh yeah, because AT&T said so

Because ATT made concessions to the govt of what they would do were the merger allowed to go through. Do you think ATT is dumb enough to renig on an agreement with the very entitity that could cause them so many problems that the shitstorm resulting could severely damage their net worth? Get real and get informed

Yeah they can go back on it then claim the govt is attacking them. Actually they can go back on it and give any excuse, whats to stop them? They are a Corporation and if they want to go back on it you would say it's their right to do so. If I said you killing yourself would create jobs would you believe me or do I have to form a corporation first?

Please point me to the place where Grampa has EVER said he thinks corporations - or anyone else - has the right to renege on contractual agreements?

 

[Cecilie1200]

and punt...Good job..

There is no punt. ITS QUITE CLEAR THAT MANY ON THE LEFT DONT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT JOBS IF IT GETS IN THE WAY ON INTERFERING WITH A LARGE COMPANY.

Seriously thats the only concern im seeing in this thread. ATT this ATT that, not one mention of the 10's of thousands of jobs that will be lost if this merger isnt approved. Yet in the very next thread you will scream WHERE ARE THE JOBS JOBS JOBS you cant fucking have it both ways

yeah thats what you are trying to make the argument about and clearly its not.
See capitalism works best when you have a lot in the pot, and not just a few choices.
See if you are going to constantly argue for free market capitalism, at least you should understand it first.
Its clear you dont.

I can't believe we're being preached to about capitalism by a bunch of liberals who are doing it to cheer on the government controlling the marketplace. It's surreal. I expect Rod Serling to show up in the corner any minute now.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Fucking Awesome. Someone has to stop At&T and their wanted monopoly.

T-Mobile users rejoice at Justice Dept. blocking AT&T merger - CNN.com

Monopoly? Puhleeze. As I understand it, T-Mobile is the #4 wireless provider, and AT&T is #2. For those of us who can count, that means there's a #1 and a #3, at least. Hardly a monopoly, and hardly likely to allow a merged company to start hiking prices and blowing off the need for technological advances.

And that's completely leaving aside the fact that there's no way to HAVE a monopoly in a market like the US without government intervention.

They're afraid that by allowing this merger, there will only be two viable companies left. Sprint is about to go the way of Pontiac, Saturn, and Oldsmobile. What the government might allow however is a T-Mobile/Sprint merger. That would only be of lasting benefit if T-Mobile had controlling power though. Sprint is such a mess right now, if they had controlling power in a merger, they would just bring everything down.

Why does anyone believe the government is so brilliant that it can and should singlehandedly decide who should and should not survive in the marketplace, and in what form? Capitalism does NOT work by the government artificially creating competition and interfering with natural market forces. All it can really accomplish is to shortsightedly hamper and retard economic movement.

 

[8537]

Monopoly? Puhleeze. As I understand it, T-Mobile is the #4 wireless provider, and AT&T is #2. For those of us who can count, that means there's a #1 and a #3, at least. Hardly a monopoly, and hardly likely to allow a merged company to start hiking prices and blowing off the need for technological advances.

And that's completely leaving aside the fact that there's no way to HAVE a monopoly in a market like the US without government intervention.

First of all, it's quite easy to have a monopoly in certain industries without government intervention. They're not called natural monopolies for their nice green color.

Second, it's The Sherman Anti-Trust act, not the Sherman Anti-Monopoly act. A business doesn't have to be a monopoly to run afoul of the law.

Could you vague that up for us a little? I can almost get a grip on one tiny corner of a substantial fact there. Not quite, but almost, and we wouldn't want THAT to happen.

I can't be held accountable for your inability to understand clearly written English.

 

[Cecilie1200]

First of all, it's quite easy to have a monopoly in certain industries without government intervention. They're not called natural monopolies for their nice green color.

Second, it's The Sherman Anti-Trust act, not the Sherman Anti-Monopoly act. A business doesn't have to be a monopoly to run afoul of the law.

Could you vague that up for us a little? I can almost get a grip on one tiny corner of a substantial fact there. Not quite, but almost, and we wouldn't want THAT to happen.

I can't be held accountable for your inability to understand clearly written English.

I didn't say I didn't understand it, fucktard. I said you didn't say anything meaningful.

Speaking of someone who doesn't understand English . . .

 

[Sallow]

Fucking Awesome. Someone has to stop At&T and their wanted monopoly.

T-Mobile users rejoice at Justice Dept. blocking AT&T merger - CNN.com

CLAP YOUR HANDS AS MUCH AS YOU WANT TOO--BECAUSE AT& T promised they would bring BACK TO THE U.S. OVER 100,000 freaking JOBS BACK TO THE U.S.-

And prior to that you freakin LIBERAL MORONS--your freaking President Bill Clinton took apart MICRO-SOFT corporation which lead to the collapse of the tech sector in 2000 you freaking DUMB-ASSE'S


Don't complain to me about outsourcing and sending JOBS overseas--YOU FREAKING MORONS.

You hit the nail on the head. They keep crying about a monopoly. It doesnt matter either way as T-Mobile is going under. The only question is do we want to try to save the jobs or let them go. The monopoly argument is moot beause either way T-Mobile wont be around much longer.

SAVE THE DAMN JOBS FOR CHRISTS SAKE.

unbelieveable stupidity and utter lack of logic in this thread

You're kidding right?

You are going along with this crap?

The "tech bubble" burst because there were garbage companies that had no idea of how to make money. You put a .com on the end of your company name and venture capital flowed right on in. And then they did IPOs. It was stupid.


Nothing to do with "Microsoft" which still exists and is going strong.

 

[Sallow]

Fucking Awesome. Someone has to stop At&T and their wanted monopoly.

T-Mobile users rejoice at Justice Dept. blocking AT&T merger - CNN.com

CLAP YOUR HANDS AS MUCH AS YOU WANT TOO--BECAUSE AT& T promised they would bring BACK TO THE U.S. OVER 100,000 freaking JOBS BACK TO THE U.S.-

And prior to that you freakin LIBERAL MORONS--your freaking President Bill Clinton took apart MICRO-SOFT corporation which lead to the collapse of the tech sector in 2000 you freaking DUMB-ASSE'S


Don't complain to me about outsourcing and sending JOBS overseas--YOU FREAKING MORONS.

No more Y2K freakout was what caused the tech bubble to burst.
And the main cause of the tech bubble as well.

No it wasn't.

The "Y2K Freakout" actually was good for the economy. It put alot of people like me to work.

 

[8537]

Could you vague that up for us a little? I can almost get a grip on one tiny corner of a substantial fact there. Not quite, but almost, and we wouldn't want THAT to happen.

I can't be held accountable for your inability to understand clearly written English.

I didn't say I didn't understand it, fucktard. I said you didn't say anything meaningful.

Speaking of someone who doesn't understand English . . .

I guess you're not that smart....Let's try again: You claimed monopolies don't exist without government inteference. They do. That's why some monopolies are called natural monopolies.

You claimed that the concern here was about monopoly. it wasn't. The law being enforced doesn't deal only with monopolies.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

CLAP YOUR HANDS AS MUCH AS YOU WANT TOO--BECAUSE AT& T promised they would bring BACK TO THE U.S. OVER 100,000 freaking JOBS BACK TO THE U.S.-

And prior to that you freakin LIBERAL MORONS--your freaking President Bill Clinton took apart MICRO-SOFT corporation which lead to the collapse of the tech sector in 2000 you freaking DUMB-ASSE'S


Don't complain to me about outsourcing and sending JOBS overseas--YOU FREAKING MORONS.

You hit the nail on the head. They keep crying about a monopoly. It doesnt matter either way as T-Mobile is going under. The only question is do we want to try to save the jobs or let them go. The monopoly argument is moot beause either way T-Mobile wont be around much longer.

SAVE THE DAMN JOBS FOR CHRISTS SAKE.

unbelieveable stupidity and utter lack of logic in this thread

You're kidding right?

You are going along with this crap?

The "tech bubble" burst because there were garbage companies that had no idea of how to make money. You put a .com on the end of your company name and venture capital flowed right on in. And then they did IPOs. It was stupid.


Nothing to do with "Microsoft" which still exists and is going strong.

I wasn't commenting on Microsoft. I was referring to this current situation. I just don't get the position of you guys. Massive amounts of jobs are at stake.

I have tried to not put on partisan glasses on this issue but the fact that the left in this thread is so anti merger I have no choice. The company (ALONG WITH THE JOBS) will go under without a merger. I see NO LOGICAL REASON to be in favor of disallowing the merger other than to support the Obama administration.

I tried damn hard to avoid making that accusation but have been left no choice. It proves the point many have made that some of you will follow Obama straight off a cliff.

 

[Trajan]

CLAP YOUR HANDS AS MUCH AS YOU WANT TOO--BECAUSE AT& T promised they would bring BACK TO THE U.S. OVER 100,000 freaking JOBS BACK TO THE U.S.-

And prior to that you freakin LIBERAL MORONS--your freaking President Bill Clinton took apart MICRO-SOFT corporation which lead to the collapse of the tech sector in 2000 you freaking DUMB-ASSE'S


Don't complain to me about outsourcing and sending JOBS overseas--YOU FREAKING MORONS.

No more Y2K freakout was what caused the tech bubble to burst.
And the main cause of the tech bubble as well.

No it wasn't.

The "Y2K Freakout" actually was good for the economy. It put alot of people like me to work.

man please....go play outside .....

 

[Contumacious]

I can't be held accountable for your inability to understand clearly written English.

I didn't say I didn't understand it, fucktard. I said you didn't say anything meaningful.

Speaking of someone who doesn't understand English . . .

I guess you're not that smart....Let's try again: You claimed monopolies don't exist without government inteference. They do. That's why some monopolies are called natural monopolies.

You claimed that the concern here was about monopoly. it wasn't. The law being enforced doesn't deal only with monopolies.

Identify, the Constitutional authority for enforcing the "law".

Don't fucking mention the Commerce nor the necessary and proper clauses.

.

 

[Fyght]

lol...oh, please like the Justice Department never got an anti-trust legislation wrong before.

This is proves that Obama is at war with the market and voluntary agreements made in the market place.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I can't be held accountable for your inability to understand clearly written English.

I didn't say I didn't understand it, fucktard. I said you didn't say anything meaningful.

Speaking of someone who doesn't understand English . . .

I guess you're not that smart....Let's try again: You claimed monopolies don't exist without government inteference. They do. That's why some monopolies are called natural monopolies.

You claimed that the concern here was about monopoly. it wasn't. The law being enforced doesn't deal only with monopolies.

I guess YOU'RE not that smart. Casually tossing out a term and going, "See?" as though that just settles the whole argument by itself is not meaningful. It is vague and unresponsive. If you still don't understand this, have someone else try to explain it to you, because I don't find you interesting enough to dig any further trying to get something real out of you.

I addressed monopolies specifically, dumbass, because the poster I was responding to - who, I believe, was not you - specifically mentioned them, not because I "claimed the concern was" JUST about monopolies.

Coming into an ongoing conversation that didn't include you and trying to reset the parameters is ALSO meaningless, vague, and useless.

So now that I've done everything but draw you a picture in Crayolas with bright, primary colors, see if you can produce a post that's worth something, rather than coming back with another version of, "You didn't praise my brilliance; you're obviously stupid and just didn't understand." I understand what you're saying all too well; that's exactly why I think it's such a giant, reeking pile of nothing.