Ayn Rand on Criminal Businessmen

[Charles Behney <charlesaugust@theriver.com>]

Here's the Ayn Rand definition of a criminal under current US Code:

Anyone who is a capitalist is a criminal. Any questions?

This is hardly a definition that would pass muster either with the
lexographers, or with most of the press.

But, we can now define whether Microsoft is criminal, by Ayn Rand's own
words>

"Under the [U.S.] antitrust laws, a man (Bill Gates) becomes a criminal
from the moment he goes into business ... if he charges prices some
bureaucrats judge as too high, he can be prosecuted for monopoly, or,
rather, for successful 'intent to monopolize'; if he charges prices
lower than those of his competitors, he can be prosecuted for 'unfair
competition' or 'restraint of trade'; and if he charges the same price
as his competitors, he can be prosecuted for collusion' or
'conspiracy.'"


http://www.capitalism.org/cm/jan/jan98_assaultgates_gw.html
.........
........

> As Ayn Rand wrote: "Under the [U.S.] antitrust laws, a man becomes a criminal from the moment
> he goes into business ... if he charges prices some bureaucrats judge as too high, he can be
> prosecuted for monopoly, or, rather, for successful 'intent to monopolize'; if he charges prices
> lower than those of his competitors, he can be prosecuted for 'unfair competition' or 'restraint of
> trade'; and if he charges the same price as his competitors, he can be prosecuted for 'collusion' or
>   'conspiracy.'"
>
> Such laws are vague, self-contradictory and elastic--which  hands government the
> ominous, unbridled power to persecute virtually any  company it pleases. Such laws serve as a
> perfect vehicle for envious competitors to enlist political power lusters in government to
> persecute and "downsize" successful corporations like Microsoft--because they are successful.
> The U.S. government's antitrust assault on Microsoft is an assault on success and liberty, and
> should be halted immediately.
>
> Furthermore, any "competition" law allowing government to regulate competition and punish
> good companies for being good should be rescinded. "Consumers" need protection from coercive
> and omnipotent governments--not from the beneficial products that Microsoft and other
>  companies provide via freedom of competition in a free market.
>
>
........
.......

So, the extreme libertarian view holds that the USA government considers
all businessmen to be criminals. Try telling that to a Congressman on
dozens of PAC pads, raising $50K a week from corporate 'criminals.'

As the french say, if there is no law, then there is no crime. Even
Declan knows that Microsoft is unethical.

What the debate is missing is that corporate accountability hides behind
NDA's and the corporate veil- government accountability hides behinds
security classifications, budgeting delays, and a host of other tricks
designed to keep the public ignorant. Either way, neither the government
nor corporations have the accountability that antitrust laws try to
achieve: protecting both capitalism and the consumer from monopolies
that can be either corporate or governmental.

I can't wait for the Federal Reserve Board to run on NT. Then you'll
know the END is near.....

CAB