By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Now Obama is going after companies that work.

NJ5 said:
@HappySqurriel: Aren't the US antitrust investigators notorious for not doing much in the past few years? I remember that came up in a lot of recent articles about the EU Intel investigation.

In general, the US has done an awful job investigating crimial acts and anti-trust cases in recent years ... But that doesn't mean that the president should assume their power, it means that the people in charge should be fired and replaced with someone who is willing and able to do their job.



Around the Network
HappySqurriel said:
NJ5 said:
@HappySqurriel: Aren't the US antitrust investigators notorious for not doing much in the past few years? I remember that came up in a lot of recent articles about the EU Intel investigation.

In general, the US has done an awful job investigating crimial acts and anti-trust cases in recent years ... But that doesn't mean that the president should assume their power, it means that the people in charge should be fired and replaced with someone who is willing and able to do their job.

I'm not familiar with these institutions, but the CNN article says it's the US justice department doing the investigation. That doesn't seem so extreme.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

highwaystar101 said:
TheRealMafoo said:
Squilliam said:
TheRealMafoo said:
So what should they do? When they steal employees, the get sued. When the promise not to, they get investigated.

They should not steal employees, but not say they won't steal employees?

If getting sued was the disincentive then they wouldn't need an informal or formal agreement to back it up if the legal contracts were binding. If the legal contracts aren't binding then the contracts themselves are moot. Either way if they were colluding its against the trade laws which are in place to help the markets run efficiently.

 

Yea, because so far the governments been doing a bang up job of making sure the markets run efficiently after the complete sh!tstorm George Bush left Obama with.

Fixed

It's easy to critisise Obama for how the economy is, but it is unfair critisism. Bush started the economic meltdown and left Obama to fix it, you can't expect Obama to fix it all overnight by magic. In a reccession you have to be willing to spend money, being conservative with it does not work.

It's all George Bush's fault!



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

^ I'm not scapegoating. People seem to want to scapegoat on Obama, I want the blame to go to someone who deserves it.



highwaystar101 said:
^ I'm not scapegoating. People seem to want to scapegoat on Obama, I want the blame to go to someone who deserves it.

Yes you are. Placing the problems of numerous peoples and issues on one person is scapegoating.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Around the Network
HappySqurriel said:

My concerns about this are whether it is appropriate for the President of the United States to do this, whether the President has the authority to do this,  and whether these investigations are being performed for political reasons (and not legal reasons) ... There are already several organizations which are supposed to perform these types of investigations and have the means to perform them in a systematic, non-political, methodology which makes me believe the worst case for all of my concerns.


While I will never convince Obama supporters of the dangers of centralizing more and more power around the presidency while he is in power, I would suggest that they consider what the risk of actions like this is if an "Evil" Republican president was elected in 2012/2016 and decided to use these new-found powers to investigate companies because they decided to heavily support their opposition.

There is a lot of anti-trust legislation out there.  This is well within the executive branch's power.  When Congress passes laws, they are TELLING the executive branch to enforce them.  Otherwise, The President isn't complying with his duties in the Constitution.  Frankly, it raises more questions that Bush was asleep at-the-wheel on anti-trust policies.  That's not faithfully executing the law.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

outlawauron said:
highwaystar101 said:
^ I'm not scapegoating. People seem to want to scapegoat on Obama, I want the blame to go to someone who deserves it.

Yes you are. Placing the problems of numerous peoples and issues on one person is scapegoating.

I'm not saying he was the sole cause, I'm saying he was a major cause. That' fair...

 



No problem with this.



So, as soon as Obama decides to encourage competition, competition becomes a bad thing. And here I thought conservatives were supposed to love the free market.



After reading the article, it seems like a very odd thing to pursue based on anti-trust allegations. Are there any precedent covering similar situations?

 



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire