Ok, so Disney behaves like a big corporation and fucks people over. Same shit, different day.
But doing it to fuck with Quentin? No. Fuck you, Quentin. No. The universe doesn't revolve around that man. It's neither about Hateful Eight nor the guy himself, it's about money and ticketsales.
I love Quentin's movies but that man's egomania really stinks.

Do enlighten me: How do you think "dominant corporation(s) or collusion thereof [will] strongarm retailers?" That simply won't happen. Rather, there will be fewer barriers to entry for other widget manufacturers to enter the market, either independently or working for competing "dominant" corporations when they discover that it's more profitable to not be "paid off" but to compete in the market instead.

A dominant corporation cannot buy every possible competitor. That's absurd. And there will always multiple "dominant" corporations, and not just one, or one and a number of "start-ups." Where there is Coke, there will be Pepsi. Where there is Apple, there will be Samsung. In a free market, monopolies and cartels cannot exist except in the very short term and at an eventual loss (unless they have the primary monopoly of the government to back them up).

If there are patents, there's no free market. A free market, by definition, must exclude all patent, trademark, copyright, and other such IP law. So, you may have picked the worst example.

Free markets without patents is not a problem at all. Not for the market and not for consumers. Companies may just be more careful about spies. They certainly wouldn't be incentivized (like they are now) to spend $millions just to hold patents on products that are never produced, only to corner the market and "strongarm" competitors (like they do now).

Companies like Bed, Bath & Beyond have been trying to price upstarts out of the market for years, decades even! And they're still not able to get rid of competitors! Same can be said about Walmart. Many stores other than Walmart sell TVs, even at higher prices, and remain competitive. Other stores sell linens besides BB&B. So, you have a distorted view of how markets actually work. No one corporation can monopolize the sale of any goods or services. That's just incorrect (unless the government helps them to do so). It just doesn't happen.

There's no such thing as a "natural monopoly." Name one. In Texas, for example, there are competing utility providers, and people can choose which energy service to use. This is in contrast to CA, where most of us are forced to "choose" PG&E over zero other alternatives.

"Restriction of information/prevention of rational, informed consumers"

I'm sorry, but anyone who has been involved in business knows this is complete horseshit. If you have a better product/service (the only way to outdo the competition), you will let the customers/market know right away.

And there's no scale at which markets collapse. The same forces of the market apply to big, small, and medium businesses. There is no arbitrary size for which these forces do not apply. And keep in mind that without government granted privileges, corporations would be much smaller than they are now, because competition would make it easier for competitors to participate, thereby forcing a re-allocation of resources to accommodate the market's demands.

So, yes you most certainly "overstated" your case. All markets can be free, regardless of size. Whether it's a small farmer's market or Whole Foods. The same market forces apply. They all have to court voluntary customers through service, price, quality, etc. Again, anyone who has had to work with marketing will know this.

BTW, things like "price dumping" are circumvented all the time. Does Rolls Royce care that Hyundai sells cheaper cars? Does Mercedes care that a Prius is less expensive?

Target makes money because Walmart is cheaper, not in spite of it!
And everything Walmart sells, you'll find many other stores selling it, even though Walmart might sell it cheaper.
The local natural food store in my neighborhood sells, more or less, the same things as Whole Foods. None of your objections pose any real problems in the real world.

I don't see Walmart buying every other TV seller, or even trying to do this. Microsoft tried but, so what? They failed, because they could not buy every single competitor in the software world, could they?

Even in Somalia, to use @enoch's example, in the telecommunications industry (to pick one that saw growth), no one even remotely managed to do any of the things you say could happen. In 20 years, no corporation did any of these things. Why not?

Because they couldn't.

And did "dominant" corporations take over all small retailers and sellers? No way, not even close! They couldn't. Only regulations can really kill all small retailers (and they do it all the time). Your outrage is gravely misplaced. Do the countless bazaars and sellers of Turkey, India, or Thailand get taken over by "dominant" corporations?

Hint: No.

Only when government meddles, do the big corporations wipe out the little ones, and sometimes each other.

In any case, Coke will not eliminate Pepsi (or Sprite, or Dr. Pepper, or A&W), government or no government.

The point of view that Sanders is taking is that corporations are paying so little that the workers have no choice but to take welfare.

I say that if there was no welfare ( well not as much as there is today) then corporations like Walmart would have to pay more. Otherwise people would not even apply.

For every dollar the government hands out in welfare, the corporations have to give a dollar more to make working for them worthwhile.

Minimum wage is not to be a living wage but an entry level wage where one can better oneself and then one would have standing to ask for a higher wage.

As far as big ass tax breaks for the big corporations I say F to that.

I agree that corps have corrupted government to favor them. Capitalism without morality is we are today.


Capitalism is the best system. We all practice capitalism every day with our purchasing dollars. We look for the best value for the good and services we desire.

And yet this is what most libertarians I come across seem to be advocating. Get rid of government, get them out of our lives and just trust the big corporations. Libertarians today seem to just be supporting a future of corporate tyranny.

I remember reading a long time ago about just how hot the coffee was and why they kept it that hot So I knew for a long time that it wasn't a case of some unscrupulous woman looking for a quick buck along with some ambulance chaser lawyers.

So even though it was *not* a frivolous lawsuit, even the reduced amount of money she actually got seems excessive. I wish we lived in a world where simply paying the medical bills and maybe a little bit extra for the trouble for recompense was adequate

But then when think about it in the context of a big corporation. How do you induce a large company to change? unless you hit them where it hurts, the pocket book. You have to admit that McDonalds initial offer of a few hundred bucks was essentially them flipping the bird to her. Had they just paid the medical bills and a little bit extra and lowered the temp of the coffee, This would never have entered the public sphere.

Maybe if we lived in a world where people weren't so obsessed about profits and the bottom line, we wouldn't have a situation like this.

I don't think the people who think the Republican party is doomed understand just how brainwashed their people are. I have to hear Fox news every day, and hear comments from conservatives every day about how everything is going to hell in a hand basket and only the Republican party can save them. It's becoming clear that all this is just galvanizing the core. They think they are being repressed, they think there is a war against Christianity (which is funny since the Republican party is perhaps the most polar opposite of the 4 larger parties, and certainly of the two majors, to the teachings of Jesus) and only Republicans will help stop that war. Their churches are telling them there is a war against Christians and how they are being repressed and to vote Republican to save them. These people, once they can no longer deny that the climate is warming and is man made, will just point how it is the end times and continue to ignore it, because Jesus is coming soon anyhow. It's like that cartoon where the rich man takes 99 of the 100 cookies, the middle class guy takes one and the poor guy has just crumbs and the rich man warns the middle class guy to watch out, that the poor guy wants his cookie, and rather than be mad at the guy who took 99 of the cookies, he actually gets mad at the poor guy for wanting one. They don't care that a rich man fires over 1000 people and keeps everyone else at minimum for 4 years without raises so he can have a jet, they see those minimum wage workers and the people he fired as the enemy.They honestly believe the big corporate media machine is the "liberal media", disregarding the fact they are very much interested in keeping the status qua going, rather than expose the truth of growing income gap in this country. By 2016 most people will have forgotten the shutdown and those that remember it won't remember it is the Republican's fault, yes, the progressives will remember, but the conservatives blame the Democrats, liberals and progressives anyhow, and the rest won't care by then. The Fox News watchers, Rush listeners are just more solidly believing now that everything is the fault of the poor and the needy and the liberals, Democrats and progressives that want to help them.

TLDR: Those seeing the end of the Republican party, must not be around the hard core enough to see how brainwashed they are by Fox, Rush and their churches. All this just solidifies their anger.

Big corporations are not to be blamed for this. We the people are to blame.
People would rather watch American got talent or other such dribble rather that see what is truly going on. Low information voters should start paying attention or better yet, don't vote.

It's a shame that we are loosing our rights by leaps and bounds and no one really cares.

Police state.
Drones,
Total loss of privacy,

If the neighborhood is that bad, and their house payments are based on 220k versus the value of the home at 20k. I really doubt they'd make enough on rent without Section 8 to break even.

They'd either be losing money due to wear and tear on the home and it needed constant maintenance and work plus not making enough to cover all the fixed costs.

Or stuck with the fixed costs and an empty place they could let sit...that would probably end up getting broken into and vandalized if the neighborhood is that bad.


It's really difficult right now to find responsible renters in "slow recovery" areas.

Dunno if you can with Section 8, but I know I'd make em carry renter's insurance at the very least. So they are on the hook for the damage they do with a nice big corporation who can afford to go after them for the damages.


There's a reason why many of the places for rent out there are ran by huge corporations who just keep getting larger....the small guys can't afford to put up with all the bullshit problems people cause them. The big guys can effectively keep you from having a place to live if you screw up one of their properties bad enough.

You're becoming a better news source than CNN, MSNBC and Fox News rolled together. I love how all the big corporations are trying to distance themselves from all these leaks. I think Microsoft is going to be especially damaged since that whole Xbox One fiasco coupled with them willingly giving NSA access to their operating systems and lying about it. Good. Let them all fall.

Wasn't there a guy in the 3rd World who was giving out small loans to people to help build up their communities. He did a lot of good by giving very small loans to smart locals. I think that's the best way instead of big corporations coming in and destroying places. I hope Detroit comes back.

Agent Orange was the chemical used by the us government in Vietnam. It is responsible for a quiet Genocide of it's people for the last 40 years. Monsanto and Dow chemical were the producers of Agent Orange.

Big Corporations own the government, this isn't news. Monsanto will do whatever they can to keep any negative press away from the people. If corporations like Monsanto with their profit today look at the future keep winning, there will be no future for us. We will have destroyed everything by letting these corporations rule us.

I'm always amazed how some people seem to treat the term "free market" as if it's some magical mantra, and that by just chanting it often enough it will somehow fix everything.
What if the market were allowed to push prices down? If there are enough big corporate interests involved what makes you think they won't collude to keep prices high, who's going to step in and offer cheaper services when business is all about making as much profit as possible?
Is the current government system corrupt and flawed? Hell yes, but that just means we need to fix the system so special interests can't just buy influence with truckloads of money. The special interests meanwhile want to end government influence simply because it's one less person they have to bribe once they are gone. The idea that everything will be unicorns and rainbows once the government is out of the picture is just a fallacy perpetuated by those who simply want to do away with annoying rules that prevent them from doing whatever the hell they please, or at least make it easier and cheaper.

>> ^budzos:

It's funny because you think you're empathic and I'm sympathetic with bullies when really it's the other way around.
1. Enjoy sucking down the big corporate cock
2. I never said the shover was a victim. I'm saying it's not necessary to involve the police in something so trivial. It doesn't help anything. It's an overreaction. It's not justice. It just makes you feel better, or something.
3. Suck that dick




im gonna go find a kid wearing something all corporate like an Adidas shirt and kick them right in the face....cuz fuck the man. youre warped. seriously

the irony is youre shouting from your soapbox using internet provided by, likely, a major corporation, like cox, and likely, from a mac.

but please keep telling us how this man-baby is championing the anti corporate resistance by shoving a young girl and being an all around douche fuck

It's funny because you think you're empathic and I'm sympathetic with bullies when really it's the other way around.

1. Enjoy sucking down the big corporate cock
2. I never said the shover was a victim. I'm saying it's not necessary to involve the police in something so trivial. It doesn't help anything. It's an overreaction. It's not justice. It just makes you feel better, or something.
3. Suck that dick

>> ^budzos:

No, I'm not afraid I'm going to lose control and shove someone unnecessarily. I haven't "assaulted" anyone since I was twelve.
What I'm afraid of is being in the proximity of people who would "absolutely file assault charges" for something where nobody was really hurt and the guy has already paid the price of looking like a complete asshole in front of the whole world. You would "absoultely" press the issue and try to sic the government on him. Why? Justice? Get fucked.
>> ^Porksandwich:
>> ^budzos:
People like you make me afraid to go out into the world.
>> ^Porksandwich:
Plus, Im guessing his shirt, shorts, shoes, and possibly his underwear. And anything else he dons on his way to the run and after the run will have a big corporate logo on it. So...... yeah. Hopefully some assault charges are in his future to go along with all that ill will he's generated. I don't see how the time frame that happened in could be a misunderstanding, and if he can't deal with the situation of corporate sponsorship of the events....he should stop going.


Is the fear of being sued for shoving people or the choice of not attending things where you may be offended/irritated/whatever and not being able to shove someone?
Hell you can't even put your hands on someone like that when they are on your own property for something as simple as wearing a mascot outfit and trying to hand you something...well NORMAL people can't get away with it at least.
I'd absolutely file assault charges against him if he put his hands on me or my kid (if I had kids) like that. He wouldn't put up with me going out and shoving his teenage kids....double standards are fun.



So he looked like an asshole in front of the world, he chose to do what he did. Him looking like an asshole doesn't negate the fact that he shoved someone, specifically a kid for approaching him and trying to hand him something who wouldn't have been on the track if they didn't have permission from the event.

He doesn't suddenly become a victim because now he looks like an asshole in front of the whole world, the victim is still the person in the mascot outfit being shoved...on camera in front of the same audience.

I think you'd feel differently if he were shoving you on camera and not just shrugging your shoulders and thinking aww shucks the poor runner man looks like an asshole. You have the expectation to not be assaulted by little known people AND well known people. Entitled to your own opinion, even if it does let grown men shove kids around. All intentional, nothing accidental happening in that video.