View Single Post
Old 05-19-2014, 07:51 AM   #35
DiapDealer
Grand Sorcerer
DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
DiapDealer's Avatar
 
Posts: 28,791
Karma: 206879174
Join Date: Jan 2010
Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8 View Post
They actually aren't mandated to do it. What they are trying to do is expand the definition of anti-trust to give themselves more control over the various companies.
It's a pointless distinction (when looking/wishing for a change). The gov't IS mandated to regulate/investigate anti-trust issues. How they go about that (or how far-reaching their "jurisdiction" goes) might be up for debate, but their mandate is not. Regardless; the correct course of action is not to wish the gov't would simply stop doing what they interpret as "their job," but rather to change/clarify the legislation that gives them their mandate (however loosely you think it might be being interpreted) in the first place.

Last edited by DiapDealer; 05-19-2014 at 08:11 AM.
DiapDealer is online now   Reply With Quote