home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky soc.history:9492 misc.legal:20089
- Path: sparky!uunet!optilink!cramer
- From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
- Newsgroups: soc.history,misc.legal
- Subject: Re: Libertarians in WW2
- Message-ID: <13221@optilink.UUCP>
- Date: 17 Nov 92 18:54:09 GMT
- References: <1992Nov16.013012.21277@gordian.com> <1992Nov16.235843.2228@midway.uchicago.edu>
- Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <1992Nov16.235843.2228@midway.uchicago.edu>, thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
- > In article <1992Nov16.204210.11462@gordian.com> mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas) writes:
- > >, it is not
- > >fair to call the 1920's and Hoover laissez-faire capitalists. The
- > >Sherman anti-trust laws and all kinds of other things had been passed
- > >by this point.
- >
- > You're telling me the fifteen fines imposed in the 1920's for antitrust
- > cases (average size: $98,000) caused the Great Depression? Please.
-
- You mean that the Sherman Antitrust Act had no influence on business
- decisions, other than fines? That no one was restrained by fear of
- suit? I think "all kinds of other things" in Mr. Thomas' posting
- refers to such entities as the Federal Trade Commission, the various
- regulatory agencies (FDA, ICC, etc.)
-
- > We'll even leave aside the argument that the Sherman Act had a positive
- > effect on the economy in its first forty years.
-
- How could it? Into the 1920s, corporations weren't subject to the
- Sherman Act -- only unions were. Remember how the 14th Amendment
- was perverted to find that corporations were "persons", and therefore
- exempted?
-
- > ted frank | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu
-
-
-
- --
- Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer My opinions, all mine!
- "Foxes prefer rabbits with short claws." -- Nadja Adolf
-