Is anyone else bothered by the lack of trust watching?

[Pro Street]

AT&T just merged with Cingular, not an overly big deal, however the choices of wireless companies is limited to

Sprint/Nextel
Verizon (former Bell Atlantic but also MCI)
Alltell
AT&T


Looking back at the merger history since the Ma Bell breakup it seems as though every few years the Bells make a closer step to forming a large company again, none of which seems to be questioned.

Cingular was created from Pac Bell and SBC

This graphic only shows half of the actual Bells reforming. There are so many splits and re-aquisitions that it's difficult to keep track




As you can see, many of the companies once forced to split have already rejoined as AT&T.

[illavbill]

My cellphone service started sucking when my AT&T went to cingular lets hope I get something out of this

[Diesel66]

free markets are fine unless you become successful ?

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

free markets are fine unless you become successful ?

I don't think success really has anything to do with anti trust, and I don't think monopolies are conducive to a true free market environment, but I suppose I could be wrong about that.

[Scrum]

My mom has worked in the telcom industry for over 30 years., mostly for the bells or whatever companies took their place (Centel, Sprint, Ameritech, SBC and now ATT).
She says the Bell breakup has caused far more problems and hurt more customers than anything else.

The Bellsouth merger had been a long time coming. There has been plenty of oversight and ATT has had to make a whole lot of concessions for it to happen. I have a list around here somewhere, not sure if it's considered sensitive information though. I'll ask her if I can post it if anyone cares.

There are a couple cell companies not on your list still and nothing is keeping a company from coming up and making it on their own. ATT is run by monkeys who are all pulling their seperate way. They aren't very powerful at the moment.

[Thorgrim]

I think people have to worry about the rise of "Mega-Corps" imagine Blackwater with a lot more money and ex-marine drill instructors training...lot of great US military men taken out to form an army for "security for hire" that turns into the military wing of a corporation

Imagine a collection of international mega-corps that has a military that rivals the US, controls the medicine, all the communication, etc

thats scary

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I think people have to worry about the rise of "Mega-Corps" imagine Blackwater with a lot more money and ex-marine drill instructors training...lot of great US military men taken out to form an army for "security for hire" that turns into the military wing of a corporation

Imagine a collection of international mega-corps that has a military that rivals the US, controls the medicine, all the communication, etc

thats scary

because governments are peaceful organizations ?

Govts in the 20th century alone murdered something like 200million people

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

because governments are peaceful organizations ?

Govts in the 20th century alone murdered something like 200million people

governments have existed for thousands of years, corporations are a bit new

besides, we all know what we do when we don't like a government, we invade or rebel

I think the system of the US as the lone super-power (perhaps in the future, the EU being a mini-check on total control) is one of the best international system we could hope for...

Giving up that power, to other forces (like we seem to be trying to help China get more and more advantages on us) or corporations is stupid considering how good we have it now

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

free markets are fine unless you become successful ?

Competition is critical to the free market being a success. When there is a monopoly there is no competition. You get corporate fascism. They buy lobbyists who buy congressmen who pass legistlation to allow for their monopoly to continue to exist. You basically have corporations running the government via lobbyists and buying votes.

They play on emotions by using words like "communism" and "socialism", or they say things like "free markets are fine unless you are successful?" when there is talk of breaking up the mega corps.

[MKULTRA]

Corporations are not new. Corporations have been around for a long, long time. Take a look at the British East India Company and others.

[Ardentfrost]

There's no such thing as a monopoly because even if one company has such low prices that no one else can get into the market, their prices are still dictated by keeping people out of that market, their quality is dictated by keeping people from getting into the market (better quality at a higher price is still competition), and their work force is dictated by every other company that exists in the nation. Technological advancements can be done by individuals, and even if the large corp buys the patent, that is still an advancement available to the people.

So all anti-trust bullshit does is cause a less efficient corp which means higher prices for us, either a lower quality product or lower supply due to constraints on making the higher quality product, and less wage/benefits for it's employees. No one is helped, everyone is hurt.

good job

[MKULTRA]

That's not really true. There can be monopolies or oligopolies fairly easily. You're not taking government interference in favor of corporations here. A great example is Wal-Mart, that bribes politicians and city officials so they can get free leases, tax exemptions, and corporate welfare. Then Wal-Mart is competing against a mom and pop store down the street that is paying for their lease, is paying their taxes, and isn't getting any corporate welfare. So it is easy to how monopolies and oligopolies are set up in tihs manner.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by MKULTRA

That's not really true. There can be monopolies or oligopolies fairly easily. You're not taking government interference in favor of corporations here. A great example is Wal-Mart, that bribes politicians and city officials so they can get free leases, tax exemptions, and corporate welfare. Then Wal-Mart is competing against a mom and pop store down the street that is paying for their lease, is paying their taxes, and isn't getting any corporate welfare. So it is easy to how monopolies and oligopolies are set up in tihs manner.

I'm sorry, I thought I was clearer than I was. I was only talking about in a natural state of doing business. Of course the government can create (or even BE) a monopoly. I wasn't really talking about that at all.

But anti-trust stuff isn't the gov't creating a monopoly, it's them breaking up a company because they think someone other than them has created a monopoly.

I obviously support the government staying out of the business of business.... in any form

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

I obviously support the government staying out of the business of business.... in any form

Like the FDA? USDA? OSHA? EPA?

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

Like the FDA? USDA? OSHA? EPA?

abso-fucking-lutely.

Customers empower business, not the government. If meat standards suck, people will want better quality meat... a USDA-like testing company would form to make sure meat quality met their standards, their studies would be published, they'd hand out stickers for who they approve, and we'd be in the same place we are now.

Of course, if meat standards didn't suck, would we need them? I bet we'd still HAVE them because at least some people would still want some assurance that the meat they were buying met certain standards.

Plus the standards presented by a consumer group like that would be better than the USDA could possibly provide.

AND, it's the fascism of these groups that doesn't allow us to have, for instance, real cantaloupes. The FDA refuses to allow them into our country, so we only have the choice of eating musk melons labeled as cantaloupes.

AND it's the inefficiency of these groups that allows a certain degree of false advertising. Fat Free, Sugar Free, Low Sodium, etc... all of these words deceive the public because the FDA doesn't tell us what they mean, they just setup certain constraints the companies have to follow.

Consumer groups are WAY more efficient, more educating to the people, and in the end, cost the consumer less money.

And don't get me started on OSHA, ugh.

[RMNIXON]

I went to SBC to get away from AT&T phone service and got them back in the merger about a year ago. I was pissed! But I do like the internet service they provide at a good price. I would want more competition but we are far better off than the old "Ma Bell" monopoly that you are probably too young to remember?

Lilly Tomlin did a great take-off on that:





"Here at the Phone Company we handle eighty-four billion calls a year. Serving everyone from presidents and kings to scum of the earth. We realize that every so often you can't get an operator, for no apparent reason your phone goes out of order, or perhaps you get charged for a call you didn't make. We don't care. You see, this phone system consists of a multibillion-dollar matrix of space-age technology that is so sophisticated, even we can't handle it. But that's your problem, isn't it? Next time you complain about your phone service, why don't you try using two Dixie cups with a string. We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company!"

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

There's no such thing as a monopoly because even if one company has such low prices that no one else can get into the market, their prices are still dictated by keeping people out of that market, their quality is dictated by keeping people from getting into the market (better quality at a higher price is still competition), and their work force is dictated by every other company that exists in the nation.

While once can try to compete with a monopoly - it is almost impossible.

1. They have massive market share, and recognition
2. They can keep their prices lower, more easily.
3. They can lower prices until smaller firms run out of capital etc...

[R-Type]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

AND it's the inefficiency of these groups that allows a certain degree of false advertising. Fat Free, Sugar Free, Low Sodium, etc... all of these words deceive the public because the FDA doesn't tell us what they mean, they just setup certain constraints the companies have to follow.

sure..and the politicians who allow this should burn..

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Consumer groups are WAY more efficient, more educating to the people, and in the end, cost the consumer less money.

And don't get me started on OSHA, ugh.

ONLY if they aren't bought..so many times, I read about 'studies' done by supposedly 'independent' groups, and if I bother to dig deep enough, I find out they're subsidiaries of relevant corporations. I don't know how bad this is in the food industry, but in IT it runs rampant. Basically I dismiss 'studies' by default because I know that somewhere there's a few paid biases in at least a few critical areas of the data used, and many times I don't have to dig at all because the bias is blatant.

As along as people can be bought, you need a system that allows an independent group to form and get its finances somewhere other than the industry it is set to regulate, and, you need another method to keep those people in line (ie election). For all its faults, the government is the logical choice because we (theoretically) have exo-economic control over the people we put there. What really needs to happen is to force a thicker wall between private business and government. That is the true fascism to fear. See, for products like food, energy, and those which can negatively affect the environment, profit cannot be the primary motive for their production. Quality/safety standards must be. It is just too dangerous for us as a society to allow otherwise. I'm not talking about a few people getting ripped off from buying lemon ipods made in china.. the health of all must be more important than profit...always. If it means that a gallon of milk is a dollar or two extra in the store to ensure it's safety, it's worth my health to pay up. Btw, you might want to consider how healthier food would impact medical care costs in the long run. I'd bet the results would be surprising if we regulate the health-compromising cheap shit ingredients and processing techniques these companies use out of the food chain.

[Ardentfrost]

So, you think the gov't and it's officials can't be bought?

The difference is when the gov't does it, no one from the private sector bothers to do it. If it's found out that a private consumer group is taking bribes which promotes people buying shit products, another company would arise and offer a better "quality" product (the product being reviews and studies and shit).

I agree there needs to be a separation between companies and government, but having the government offer solutions to private matters isn't the answer to achieve that goal. It's actually counter-productive to that goal. The more the government steps into the market, the more companies have to gain by getting politicians and other officials on their side.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Kytro

While once can try to compete with a monopoly - it is almost impossible.

1. They have massive market share, and recognition
2. They