From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,345c9fcf5a67a99f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-25 00:58:14 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!supernews.com!telocity-west!TELOCITY!news-out.nuthinbutnews.com!propagator-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!128.39.3.168!uninett.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Microsoft takes on ACT Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 07:58:13 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology Message-ID: References: <3CED2E66.DD15C13D@despammed.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1022313493 2339 129.241.83.82 (25 May 2002 07:58:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 07:58:13 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24729 Date: 2002-05-25T07:58:13+00:00 List-Id: On Fri, 24 May 2002 10:31:01 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote: >> >> What is a totally free market? Looking at the "Free" Markets today one > > There is no such thing as a "totally free market" and I doubt there ever has > been. There are always some parts of any economy that are what is called > "command economy". (Police protection, fire protection, public libraries, > etc. are all examples of "command" aspects of the economy.) What has this to do with the "market" being free or not. You can also add: Schools, army, hospitals etc... It depends in which country you are. American hospitals are private (at least most) but as I recall they are not at all cost effiecient compared to hospitals in other countries where this service is in the "command economy" sector. >> see that companies gets bigger and bigger and fewer and fewer. I think > > Not at all true. Actually, quite the opposite. "Free" markets are for the > most part driven by small businesses. Generally, the less they tend towards > "Command" economies, the easier it is for small businesses to start up, gain > a toe hold and become successful. The more an economy tends towards a > "Command" economy, the more it tends to breed large, inefficient, > politically driven and unaccountable organizations to deliver goods and > services. Ok you are discussion something else. I have not said anywhere that one shouldn't have a free market I was just commenting on some of its flaws. But it is quite typical that if one do this one gets stamped as being on the other side. I don't understand why. >> been a company, Microsoft would have bought it and dismantled it in >> order to keep its place. Now they try by spreading FUD. >> > You may be right if Linux had been a closed source, proprietary thing. > However, Linux *could* have been a company and *still* been in a position to > threaten Microsoft. ACT is a company and they build GNAT for fun and profit, > yet it is still open source and of some potential threat to Microsoft. Look at the history of f.ex M$ and you will see that they have bought a lot of companies to keep its position. You can start with Corel. >> >> The Free Market revolves around the survival of the fittest which means >> you will always get large companies dominating and smaller companies > > Not at all true. Sure, there is a tendency for successful companies to get > more successful, but there is also a tendency for large companies to get > "too large" for their own good & they are easily beaten by smaller, more > agile companies. History is repleat with examples. IBM? Where did Compaq, > Dell and Gateway get the idea they could ever kick IBM's butt when they were > just little guys starting out in garages? But this is survival of the fittest. The bigger companies gets bigger and bigger and then they may fall over if/when they get too static. >> trying to grow up to overturn the "leader". The problem is that the >> bigger companies won't play fair. The advantage smaller comanies may > > Where does it say on the admission ticket that existence is "fair"? :-) It is the foundation of Free market. > Markets work. I'm not against some regulation by government to make sure > that companies don't do bad things - like pollute Lake Erie or lie to their > investors. However, you really have a kind of a line on which to choose from > as to how you want to distribute goods and services: > > {Totally-Free-Market}.........................................{Total Command > Economy} > > You have to pick where on that line you want to fall. Hint: The closer > people have come to the right-hand-side, the more they have generated > poverty, oppression and failure. :-) Actually that is not true at all. The closer you get to either side of your line the more poverty and class distinction you will find. I visited Denver for a conference and in one week I was begged for money more times than in other west European country. No I believe more in a balanced point somewhere on this line. Preben