# Shodan Has Issues with Dean **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 7, 2004, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296 "2004-01-07T21:59:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2004, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/141 "2004-01-09T20:28:12Z")
I’ve got a sneaking suspicion that Clark is going to give Dean a run for his money. Although he’s done his share of waffling, his stance on the major issues is pretty damn close to Dean’s, and he may emerge, among the primary voters, as the Dem best able to beat Bush. I hadn’t noticed until recently that Clark also wants to repeal the entire Bush tax cut. I’m sure that, come elevetion time, if either of these guys get the nomination they’ll have their “middle class tax cut” plan out there so as not to piss off too many people. It’s interesting how the insiders (Kerry, Gephardt) aren’t doing very well. Perhaps it’s just a reflection of my distaste for career Washington politicians, but I would much prefer either Clark or Dean to run against Bush. **DtC** : I, too, would agree with your statement about the unilateral decision by the US. However, while I would commend Canada (and maybe Gernmany) for standing up to Bush, there is little to commend the French for, other than their sorry-ass desire to maintain the fiction that they are a Great Power. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2004, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/142 "2004-01-09T21:12:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Debaser \* > \*\*You know what? For the most part, it worked. Enron is out of business. That’s the solution with capitalism. \*\* You’re leaving out the extensive collateral damage done to (for example) thousands of its former employees and their pensions, and to the severe energy crisis that hit the western U.S., California in particular, which coincidentally (or not) was largely ignored by Bush. Those states didn’t vote for Bush in 2000, so he has little interest in helping them. Enron’s collapse corruption didn’t just hurt the stockholders. The damage was quite extensive. The free market has done nothing to make up for any of that. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2004, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/143 "2004-01-09T21:37:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Knorf \* > You’re leaving out the extensive collateral damage done to (for example) thousands of its former employees and their pensions, and to the severe energy crisis that hit the western U.S., California in particular, which coincidentally (or not) was largely ignored by Bush. Investing your pension solely (or even mostly) in your company’s stock is foolish. It’s unfortunate that so many people have to learn that the hard way. Capitalism is not designed to reward laziness (of thinking or action). If you want an economic system that does, then you definitely don’t want capitalism. CA’s energy problems had more to do with stupid decisions made by politicians here than by anything a private company did. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2004, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/144 "2004-01-09T22:16:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > Investing your pension solely (or even mostly) in your company’s stock is foolish. It’s unfortunate that so many people have to learn that the hard way. Well, I believe in some cases they were forced to keep at least part of it in company stock. Also, while this may seem foolish, it is significantly more foolish if you are being lied to and not being let in on the facts. Some of us believe that perhaps these offenses are more worthy of disdain and punishment than a certain amount of foolishness is. > [@](#): > > Capitalism is not designed to reward laziness (of thinking or action). If you want an economic system that does, then you definitely don’t want capitalism. No, indeed. The kind of economic system that seems to be endorsed or at least tolerated by this Administration and many of its friends seems to be one that rewards cronyism, connections, and insider information. > [@](#): > > CA’s energy problems had more to do with stupid decisions made by politicians here than by anything a private company did. While there was indeed some stupidity involved on the part of politicians, that stupidity was such that it allowed private companies to “game” the system. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2004, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/145 "2004-01-09T23:29:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jshore \* > Well, I believe in some cases they were forced to keep at least part of it in company stock. If they were (and you’ll have to document that), I’d bet you 10 bucks it was only money in their retirement acc’ts that Enron put there-- either as part of a bonus, or as matching funds. In which case I say B.F.D. > [@](#): > > Also, while this may seem foolish, it is significantly more foolish if you are being lied to and not being let in on the facts. Some of us believe that perhaps these offenses are more worthy of disdain and punishment than a certain amount of foolishness is. It’s called: diversify. Every investment advisor and/or investment book of any credibiliy tells you to do this. In many respects, the real looser here is Arthur Anderson & Co. Had they done their jobs correctly, that mess could’ve been avoided. Now they no longer exist. > [@](#): > > No, indeed. The kind of economic system that seems to be endorsed or at least tolerated by this Administration and many of its friends seems to be one that rewards cronyism, connections, and insider information. Strawman. > [@](#): > > While there was indeed some stupidity involved on the part of politicians, that stupidity was such that it allowed private companies to “game” the system. Which is one of the main reasons we got rid of Davis. So, Enron, Anderson and Davis all got taken care of by the free enterprise/democratic process. The “innoccents” that got hurt are the ones who didn’t do their homework about what company they a) worked for and/or b) invested in. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2004, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/146 "2004-01-09T23:55:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > If they were (and you’ll have to document that), I’d bet you 10 bucks it was only money in their retirement acc’ts that Enron put there-- either as part of a bonus, or as matching funds. In which case I say B.F.D. Oh, okay, great **John**. Have I got a deal for you. It’s a job that won’t require more than 60 hours per week and I’ll pay you a million bucks, all bonus. [I assume that if I pay you in counterfeit money (and then perhaps even get away without going to jail), you won’t mind…After all, B.F.D.] > [@](#): > > It’s called: diversify. Every investment advisor and/or investment book of any credibiliy tells you to do this. Hmmm…the next time we talk about crime and some horrendous case like the Central Park Jogger, will you have the same sort of “blame the victim” and just sort of ignore the perpetrator attitude. After all, any woman should know that it is stupid to go running in Central Park alone. It’s her own stupid fault, n’est pas? > [@](#): > > Which is one of the main reasons we got rid of Davis. So, Enron, Anderson and Davis all got taken care of by the free enterprise/democratic process. The “innoccents” that got hurt are the ones who didn’t do their homework about what company they a) worked for and/or b) invested in. Well, hey, we’ve pretty much got a tautology here if we define the process as working as long as the company fails in the end and the politician is kicked out and what-not…and that we just blame those who got screwed for not “do[ing] their homework”. And, don’t particularly worry if some of the criminals get away with millions of dollars. Wow, what a wonderful system! (And, was Davis the one who devised the faulty deregulation scheme anyway? I wasn’t aware that he was but maybe I’m wrong.) By the way, there is a good [op-ed](http://query.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?tntget=2004/01/09/opinion/09KRUG.html&tntemail0) today by Paul Krugman on the Enron debacle and the fact that we still haven’t cleaned up the system. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/147 "2004-01-10T00:29:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jshore \* > Oh, okay, great **John**. Have I got a deal for you. It’s a job that won’t require more than 60 hours per week and I’ll pay you a million bucks, all bonus. > > [I assume that if I pay you in counterfeit money (and then perhaps even get away without going to jail), you won’t mind…After all, B.F.D.] Strawman. > [@](#): > > Hmmm…the next time we talk about crime and some horrendous case like the Central Park Jogger, will you have the same sort of “blame the victim” and just sort of ignore the perpetrator attitude. After all, any woman should know that it is stupid to go running in Central Park alone. It’s her own stupid fault, n’est pas? Got any more straw for that man? What is this, Wizard of Oz day at the SDMB? > [@](#): > > Well, hey, we’ve pretty much got a tautology here if we define the process as working as long as the company fails in the end and the politician is kicked out and what-not…and that we just blame those who got screwed for not “do[ing] their homework”. And, don’t particularly worry if some of the criminals get away with millions of dollars. Wow, what a wonderful system! (And, was Davis the one who devised the faulty deregulation scheme anyway? I wasn’t aware that he was but maybe I’m wrong.) If you’re arguing for better enforcement of existing laws, that’s something we can talk about. It’s unclear to me that we need new laws. Correct me if that’s not what you’re proposing. > [@](#): > > By the way, there is a good [op-ed](http://query.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?tntget=2004/01/09/opinion/09KRUG.html&tntemail0) today by Paul Krugman on the Enron debacle and the fact that we still haven’t cleaned up the system. Good…Krugman. Oxymoron? Hey, I figured since you were so fast and loose with the strawmen, you’d let one tiny _ad hominem_ pass.🙂 ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/148 "2004-01-10T00:29:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > Capitalism is not designed to reward laziness (of thinking or action). Nor is it “designed” (who did that, anyway?) to make investment decisions essentially rolls of the dice as to which investments are legitimate and which fraudulent and to what degree, or which of the fraudulent ones will blow up when. There are rules to the game, enforced by government because only government can do it, that are intended to protect _investors_, too. But you’re apparently blaming real people’s real losses on their own individual failures to go into the CFO’s office and do their own personal due-diligence audits. That is a hard-line libertarian’s wet dream. In reality, we all have to depend on others to make sure the rules are followed. “Kenny Boy” and pals weren’t in any real fear of having their shell games stopped by any outside agency, and even the internal auditors had no real authority. But that’s the brand of “capitalism” you’re defending so dismissively? > [@](#): > > CA’s energy problems had more to do with stupid decisions made by politicians here than by anything a private company did. Certainly there has been a lot of contribution to the problem by politicians making decisions based on what the people of that good state said they wanted and voted for in binding referenda - in this case, cheap power with no pollution sources in-state and so forth, and with a system that invited fraudulent manipulation. You got the system you demanded. Don’t blame your hired employees for its failure. ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/149 "2004-01-10T02:00:57Z")
I need to get in the middle of all this flak for a second: **John Mace** : thanks for the clarification to **Sam**. And on the options: I thought they were, but I exercised today and they took full taxes out. So I guess not. Or maybe the law changed somewhere along the way. I dunno. Obligatory Bush Bash on Economics: 1000 jobs net gain today. And the previous months were revised down. Woo-hoo! That’ll win the election in November, eh? Anyway, returning you now to your regularly scheduled 10 rounder with my liberal fellow-traveller… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/150 "2004-01-10T02:07:49Z")
> [@](#): > > Elvis wrote: > Nor is it “designed” (who did that, anyway?) to make investment decisions essentially rolls of the dice as to which investments are legitimate and which fraudulent and to what degree, or which of the fraudulent ones will blow up when. There are rules to the game, enforced by government because only government can do it, that are intended to protect investors, too. > > But you’re apparently blaming real people’s real losses on their own individual failures to go into the CFO’s office and do their own personal due-diligence audits. Nope. It’s just **another** reason you diversify. Even with the best due diligence, you probably will muck it up from time to time. And actually, rolling the dice for stock picks is not a bad strategy when compared to how many people invest. So what was it that brought down Enron if the “boys” had “no real fear of their shell games stopped…”? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/151 "2004-01-10T12:23:41Z")
\*\*Every example I can think of from the Savings and Loan debacle of the 80s to the California energy crisis of the 90s to the Enron collapse of 2000 (abetted by a dangerously conflicted and still insufficiently regulated accounting industry) illustrates the tendency of deregulation to cause vastly more economic harm than it cures. \*\* Explain why the same does not apply to civil rights. Since we have criminals, why not have more regulation of personal activity? Doesn’t that mean the Patriot Act is a good thing? Shouldn’t we rush to expand it and pass Patriot II? It is always so easy to call for the limitation of the rights of others. You also ignore the successful deregulation of telecom and the airlines. Further, you leave out the fact that the more excessive the regulation, the more impossible it is for small businesses to participate in the industry in question. A heavily regulated industry means that only mega-corporations can do business. You can never have another Tucker producing cars in the current regulatory environment in the auto industry. A person can’t just say, “I think I want to sell electricity!” You can’t, because most states mandate a monopoly and competition is outlawed. In a free country, no legal business should be outlawed just because the government decides that monopolies are more efficient. Let the consumers decide. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/152 "2004-01-10T21:12:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > Strawman. > > Got any more straw for that man? What is this, Wizard of Oz day at the SDMB? Well, I don’t think they are strawmen…Rather they are analogies. Admittedly, no analogy is perfect and I know this one isn’t. But, you haven’t bothered to explain exactly what you find wrong with it and why you believe it is okay to blame the victim in this case so much more than in those other cases. > [@](#): > > If you’re arguing for better enforcement of existing laws, that’s something we can talk about. It’s unclear to me that we need new laws. Correct me if that’s not what you’re proposing. Well, to be honest, I don’t understand this issue well enough to have a very well-formulated position on precisely what is needed. However, what I do think is that it is ridiculous to make the claim that the sytem is basically fine as is…i.e., that there are no major problems with the laws, the enforcement, the political influence, or something. It seems particularly agregious when people try to claim that this showed that capitalism works because in the end the company went down. It ignores the point that some innocent people (even if you do think they were poor investors) got fleeced and that some criminals made out extremely well. > [@](#): > > Good…Krugman. Oxymoron? Well, try it. You may find you like it. I don’t think he even mentions Bush…or barely. He has more negative to say about Lieberman. ---
**Author:** ![KoalaBear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47c2d/32.png) [@KoalaBear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KoalaBear)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2004, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/153 "2004-01-11T00:28:59Z")
> [@](#): > > _ **Adaher** wrote:_\*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > Every example I can think of … illustrates the tendency of deregulation to cause vastly more economic harm than it cures. > > Explain why the same does not apply to civil rights.\*\* In fact it does: the [first 10 amendments](http://memory.loc.gov/const/bor.html) to the Constitution impose strict regulations to prevent the government from abusing its power. > [@](#): > > **It is always so easy to call for the limitation of the rights of others.** Corporations are _organizations_, not _individuals_. It’s absurd to suggest that a regulation prohibiting corporations from [fixing commodity prices](http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/investing/20001221c.asp?prodtype=grn), for example, is tantamount to an infringement of a civil liberty. > [@](#): > > **You also ignore the successful deregulation of telecom and the airlines** Airlines were regulated in the first place because it was feared that if carriers were allowed to race to the bottom with respect to ticket prices they’d [sacrifice safety to achieve economy](http://www.cnn.com/US/valujet.592/), and it would be difficult to prove that hasn’t happened. Consumers may pay less per passenger mile today than they did in 1977, but they may also be flying in an airliner that is [dangerously obsolete](http://www.aviationtoday.com/reports/aswspecial.htm). As for the telecommunications industry, if ‘[unmitigated disaster](http://www.msg.com/ssit-boston/meltdown/020926-web.htm)’ is what you meant by the word ‘success’ I would have to agree with you – [radio as a popular media is dead](http://www.clearchannelsucks.org/), and let’s not forget [Global Crossing](http://www.globaldoublecrossing.com/) and [MCI WorldCom](http://news.com.com/2100-1033-939478.html) as shining examples of the new, happy life the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has ushered us into. > [@](#): > > **Further, you leave out the fact that the more excessive the regulation, the more impossible it is for small businesses to participate in the industry in question. A heavily regulated industry means that only mega-corporations can do business … A person can’t just say, "I think I want to sell electricity!"** That’s not a fact, it’s an inference. But it sounds to me like you’re arguing that pesky government regulations – reaction control, monitoring, containment, disposal and so forth – are the only thing keeping Mom & Pop out of the nuclear power industry. There’s an old joke that the definition of insanity is to repeat a mistake while expecting a different outcome, and by that measure [deregulation of the power industry](http://www.tpj.org/Lobby_Watch/dereg.html) is the epitome of lunacy itself. > [@](#): > > **In a free country, no legal business should be outlawed just because the government decides that monopolies are more efficient.** On the contrary, it’s businesses themselves that prefer monopoly over competition, and despite attempts to do so the government is sometimes [unable to break a monopoly](http://www.naag.org/issues/microsoft/index.php) once it’s entrenched. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2004, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/154 "2004-01-11T00:58:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* > Consumers may pay less per passenger mile today than they did in 1977, but they may also be flying in an airliner that is [dangerously obsolete](http://www.aviationtoday.com/reports/aswspecial.htm). I count two deadly aircraft accidents by major carriers in the US during 2003, with a total of 23 deaths. [Link](http://aviation-safety.net/database/2003/2003-loss.html) I can’t find any fatalities for major US airlines in 2002. [Link](http://aviation-safety.net/database/2002/2002-loss.html) Is this really a problem? More importantly to this thread, does Howard Dean view it to be a problem? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2004, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/155 "2004-01-11T01:08:05Z")
> [@](#): > > Airlines were regulated in the first place because it was feared that if carriers were allowed to race to the bottom with respect to ticket prices they’d sacrifice safety to achieve economy, and it would be difficult to prove that hasn’t happened. Consumers may pay less per passenger mile today than they did in 1977, but they may also be flying in an airliner that is dangerously obsolete. In fact, airline safety has improved dramatically since deregulation, at about the same rate it was improving before deregulation. Not only has airline safety improved dramatically, but ticket prices have plummeted and there is far more air travel now than there was before deregulation. This means freedom of mobility has increased. And since airline travel is by far the safest way to move long distances, opening access to it has no doubt saved many thousands of lives. Telecom deregulation has slashed prices for long distance service. Maybe you’re too young to remember what it used to be like before deregulation - I don’t know. But I can remember when calling Grandma just a few hundred miles away was a major expense. Now we have cell phones, flat rate calling, and a whole raft of services we never used to have. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2004, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296/156 "2004-01-11T12:33:47Z")
**Corporations are organizations, not individuals. It’s absurd to suggest that a regulation prohibiting corporations from fixing commodity prices, for example, is tantamount to an infringement of a civil liberty.** Any law that applies to corporations also applies to the small business owner, who is most definitely an individual who has a right to make a living. The example of anti-price fixing legislation is a poor one that I’d like to make a couple of comments on: 1. It is legislation, it originated in Congress, as per Congresses duties. I object to the executive branch issuing regulations, which have the same force as any law passed by Congress, effectively making the executive branch an legislative branch. 2. Price fixing laws are sensible and CONTRIBUTE to competition by preventing monopolistic activity. What I object to is laws that outlaw competition in the interest of maintaining monopolies, such as in the electricity industry. \*\*Airlines were regulated in the first place because it was feared that if carriers were allowed to race to the bottom with respect to ticket prices they’d sacrifice safety to achieve economy, and it would be difficult to prove that hasn’t happened. Consumers may pay less per passenger mile today than they did in 1977, but they may also be flying in an airliner that is dangerously obsolete. \*\* As long as safety regulations are enforced, this should not be a worry. **As for the telecommunications industry, if ‘unmitigated disaster’ is what you meant by the word ‘success’ I would have to agree with you – radio as a popular media is dead, and let’s not forget Global Crossing and MCI WorldCom as shining examples of the new, happy life the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has ushered us into.** Any time more companies are able to participate there will be examples of problems, just as allowing more people into a public park means there will be more crime in that park. Radio is dead because it’s obsolete. Which is another problem with heavy regulation. It stifles innovation. When the government finally recognizes reality and deregulates, the dislocations are extreme because they waited to long. **That’s not a fact, it’s an inference. But it sounds to me like you’re arguing that pesky government regulations – reaction control, monitoring, containment, disposal and so forth – are the only thing keeping Mom & Pop out of the nuclear power industry. There’s an old joke that the definition of insanity is to repeat a mistake while expecting a different outcome, and by that measure deregulation of the power industry is the epitome of lunacy itself.** I already said that safety regulations make sense. However, regulations in some industries go way beyond insuring safety. **On the contrary, it’s businesses themselves that prefer monopoly over competition, and despite attempts to do so the government is sometimes unable to break a monopoly once it’s entrenched** Sure, they love it. Government loves it too, especially since they can regulate a monopoly so much that it essentially becomes an arm of the government. It’s socialism without actual government ownership. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-has-issues-with-dean/223296.md?page=7)