View Single Post
Old 02-12-2010, 02:08 PM   #19
zerospinboson
"Assume a can opener..."
zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
zerospinboson's Avatar
 
Posts: 755
Karma: 1942109
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Local Cluster
Device: iLiad v2, DR1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Argel View Post
It is Macmillan that is price fixing. I'm amazed that in a free-market economy such as the US it's even legal. 'Retail price maintenance' was banned in the UK decades ago.
The "US" doesn't so much like free-market economics, as they dislike anything that can be characterized/tarred as "regulation". This means that anything that's historical is assumed to be good, whereas any changes (even changes that promote competition and fair play) are looked at with suspicion. This means that publishers will be able to characterize "banning price fixing" as "government nannying, not letting the market do its job" (note: It doesn't matter at all that this is a rather unfair characterization, it's soundbites that count), and hit a nerve with consumers/legislators.
And that's the way the cookie crumbles, sadly.
zerospinboson is offline   Reply With Quote