Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

"Preben Randhol" <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote in message
news:slrnaet3n4.1kd.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no...
>
> Yes, but then you need goverments that take action when the free market
> doesn't work because the biggest companies uses illegal methods to keep
> their position. You do not need goverments who looks the other way and
> says "ok, but next time try to keep it secret".
>
The concept of a "Free Market" is not quite up there with "Total Chaos" and
those who espouse free markets do not generally condone criminal behavior.
We do need governments to establish laws governing conduct in the
marketplace so that fraud, theft, chaos and destruction are not used as
tools of commerce. (Businessmen are just as capable of being corrupt as are
politicians. Fortunately, they don't usually control the army and police
force. :-) But that doesn't mean that we therefore need governments deciding
what should be made, how it should be made, when it should be made, to whom
it should be given, etc. etc. etc. That is a "Command" economy and every one
ever created has either already collapsed or is on the verge of collapsing.


> The problem with the free market is that the only steering comitee it is
> supposed to have is the consumers. This is not enough. There will always
> be the collective irrationalism to hinder it, besides the consumers do
> not have any means of dealing with the cheating in the free market. If
> you think so, then tell me why people stick to the hopless Word
> wordprocessor of writing documents when there are better alternatives.
> Because everybody else uses Word. See what I mean?
>
Markets may be Efficient, but they are not necessarily Fast. Word didn't
gain its dominance by not offering the customer some kind of value they
couldn't get elsewhere. Once it got its dominance, it can hang onto it for a
good long time, but eventually a better product that better satisfies what
the market wants can and will supplant Word. (Star Office is making inroads
to the market is it not?)

And if the choice of Word is irrational, what substitute would we have to
make the "choice" of word processors more rational? A committee in
Washington deciding what the current best offering is for word processing &
then mandating it be used by all computer users? I'd rather leave it to the
irrational market. :-)

> And speaking of free market, why does the USA impose a tax on imported
> steel now?
>
Who said everyone who votes in the United States is a Milton Friedman Free
Market Advocate in good standing? Voters here run the gammut all the way
from Pure, Unadultrated Fat-Free Capitalists to Absolute Totalitarian
Command Economy Communists and every stripe in between. Politicians who want
to buy votes will cater to the desires of the interest groups out there who
want all sorts of stupid things - including the right to pick the pockets of
their neighbors to buy the stuff they want. Just because an idea is *stupid*
doesn't mean you can't convince a bunch of voters to back it.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com