What are the positve and negatives of antitrust laws?
915258
butters_2121  You are on newspaper!\nhttp://www.osoq.com/funstuff/extra/extra01.asp?strName=butters_2121
948526
Monopoly.\n\nEvery for profit firm wants to monopolize their industry (assuming there were no anti-trust laws). The only factor that would effect your price is marginal cost and marginal revenue of demand.  This would be the way to maximize economic profits, due to the fact that you have no real competition except people just doing without your service.  Your pricing strategy becomes much simpler.\n\nIf your company is really interested in serving the community then you would still be able to give away all the producer surplus.\n\nMonopolies are bad for consumers which is why the government steps in to break up trusts.  They are really good for producers which is why businesses always are trying to do it.  If businesses had no reason to monopolize there would be no anti trust laws.
1003841
pros - life experience\n\ncons - difficulty in getting job
477040
Agency trade systems are ILLEGAL in most of the United States. Be very wary of these kind of systems.
33930
As stated before they both have advantages and disadvantages. But in my opinion Common law is better, because then everyone is treated the same.
803993
I enjoyed it.  Everyone helped everyone else and the people who caused trouble didn't last very long.  \n\nThe bad thing is that both of the companies I worked for went under because they couldn't compete with goods coming in from other countries.
361545
It is generally a good thing.  It is a cheaper alternative than litigation and not nearly as adversary.  It has a structure but not as formal.\n\nHere is some information as to the drawbacks.\n\n"Critics of arbitration argue that contractual requirements to arbitrate can be unfair to employees or consumers who have no power to negotiate what is often a form contract. In these cases, the choice of arbiter may be spelled out in a contract. The arbitration panel may contain industry experts who may be more sympathetic to the industry than to the individual. Also, some have argued that the fact that an arbitration company may handle many cases for a corporation while an individual rarely goes through arbitration twice may bias the arbitrators in favor of the company. On this note, many arbitration companies have these corporations as their sole source of income, further biasing their judgments. The fact that most arbitral procedures are not public, and that there may be no provision for an individual to be represented by counsel, may also work to the disadvantage of the individual. These potential disadvantages make the ethics and professionalism of arbitrators even more important.\n\nArbitration in the U.S. has also been criticized because of the unavailability of appellate review. Although the New York and federal arbitration laws were based on the English arbitration law of 1898, they omitted the English provision permitting for de novo review of questions of law. Thus, American courts can overturn arbitral rulings only for extremely gross procedural errors that violate due process, but cannot reverse most substantive errors.\n\nUnlike judicial opinions, arbitration opinions are often confidential. As a result, the law relating to activities (such as reinsurance contracts and certain types of securities industry disputes) where contracts to arbitrate are widespread may develop more slowly because the usual process of creating precedent is not available." information taken from wikipedia.
1143504
Legal risks as well as the tax consequences are very big.  HR and cultural issues becomes another concern.  Marketing as well as filing requirements in the countries affected, etc...just to name a few.\n\nThere's really too little information here to give any meaningful advice.
586530
Of course its good for the country, it shows that the economical situations in the country are improving and the investors are earing.\nThere is no bad point i can find about it.
9719
This question is vague and not exactly related to law and ethics.  Nevertheless, I've included a link to a USA Today story about IBM and outsourcing in North Carolina, which the article proclaims is at the "center" of the outsourcing debate.  Similar incidents can be found with a Google search.
229722
Pros of new brands:\n\n- gives company new identity, especially if established brand is old and tired \n- prevents dilution of existing brand, esp. if it is well entrenched in a particular segment\n- breathes fresh life to a company; shows innovativeness\n- allows a business to enter into a new field that it previously did not have a presence or has marginal presence
129679
If you figure 'em out completely, you'll be richer than Bill G.\n\nEconomic law proves that when individuals act without barriers to exchange they bring about states of affairs more desirable to themselves than if they act with barriers to exchange. When the "free market" reduces the price of a commodity, what's really happening is that individual suppliers are reducing the prices of their goods in order to maximize their profits in the face of competition. When the "free market" increases the quality of a good, what's happening is that suppliers are making better products, in order to maximize profit in the face of competition. When the "free market" bankrupts one supplier and makes another a millionaire, what is really happening is that individual consumers chose to spend their money on the latter supplier's product, in order to maximize the utility of their money.\n..\nLet us then consider more closely the nature of economic laws, and their limitations. Every cause has a tendency to produce some definite result if nothing occurs to hinder it. Thus gravitation tends to make things fall to the ground: but when a balloon is full of gas lighter than air, the pressure of the air will make it rise in spite of the tendency of gravitation to make it fall. The law of gravitation states how any two things attract one another. how they tend to move towards one another, and will 'move towards one another if nothing interferes to prevent them. The law of gravitation is therefore a statement of tendencies.\n...\nLast link takes a while to get to the point, but generally 3 different views.  Nothing like comparing free market to Marxism.
1070839
I don't know all of the ins and outs, but here are some:\n\n-- b2b, there are fewer regulations and limitations.  If a deal goes south, they sue you.  With b2c, there are a lot more consumer protections\n-- ethically, you have limitations on marketing with b2c: advertising to kids, getting kids' personal information, making financial claims, etc.  \n-- with consumers, you've got sales tax (I think only Illinois is trying to collect online sales tax, but others are discussion it).  If they were to charge it, you've got MAJOR issues with figuring out local taxes (It's hard enough with retail companies with several locations)\n\n\nGood luck
1155187
Competition is vital in any democracy.  Competetion drives inventiveness and efficiency.  Imagine that there were only a single computer manufacturer to supply computers to all of the EU.  What would be their incentive to, a) produce at the lowest cost and highest quality possible, and to b) continue to develop better computers?  None!  But introduce a second manufacturer-a competitor-into that economy, and suddenly, both are studying their bottom line, are selling for the lowest price that they can reasonably sell for, are producing effeciently, and are working to develop a better product-to differientiate themself from the other manufacturer.\n\nOne important note: this phenomena is driven by the desire for profit.  But it is interesting to note that almost every significant technological advancement in the past 100 years (and, many such advancements throughout history) have come about as a result of competition.  One example is, as alluded to above, the processors that are built into our computers today.  High speed processors came about by companies striving-out of competitiveness-to build a slightly better (faster) product than "the other guy."
330773
a disadvantage is that if the union decides to strike you're stuck without work.  also the union dues.  I don't know what the advantages are but where I work the warehouse workers are unionized and they are a pain in management's butt.
13632
Cons, can be illegal, Pro's, free.
543707
CON WOULD BE NEGATIVE.............PRO IS AFFIRMATIVE