Kent complained: "I believe my statements in support of the antitrust guidelines come out of respect for the laws of the land, and I consider any characterization of that respect as "paranoid" or "fearful" to be unfair and mean-spirited." Laws are being challenged, and often quite rightly, every day in America. Rather than being "mean-spirited," it's an honorable and distinctly American tradition to challenge -- that is, to "disrespect" a law sufficiently to want to change it -- and, in fact, it was out of such "disrespect" that this country was born. As for anti-trust laws, from my study of them during my econ-major days, I consider them to be an incoherent, logically contradictory mess -- and their execution even *more* logically incoherent and contradictory. But even as crazy as they are, they don't forbid people or organizations from posting prices, or from making wages public knowledge; that's done by most major businesses in the U.S. Anti-trust concerns *collusion*, implied or explicit, not public disclosure of basic business data. But I do agree with you on one thing: this kind of discussion is better reserved for other lists (I'm a member of philosophy lists which discuss these kinds of issues all the time, and I see no need to do it here, though to peremptorily suggest that we can't occasionally indulge in such exchanges seems excessively heavy-handed). Best, Jeffo
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC