Replies

I have no problem with Rockefeller having a lot of money. I have problems with any tactics he ever used that were intentionally designed to keep all others out of the oil market.

To the extent that he used goons to break kneecaps, lowball pricing to ruin others, and/or paid off politicians to prevent others, then I have a problem. That is not a free market.

It is clear in our day that extremely rich men draw a lot of attention to themselves when they try to influence politics. George Soros is an example.

I guess it is not possible for Soros to do ANYTHING at all with his own money that would be negative for the nation.

That's why everyone loves him so much.

"I have problems with any tactics he ever used that were intentionally designed to keep all others out of the oil market.

To the extent that he used goons to break kneecaps, lowball pricing to ruin others, and/or paid off politicians to prevent others, then I have a problem. That is not a free market."

Physical violence is wrong, but *lowball pricing* isn't. It was his oil, to price as he pleased. If he wanted to give it away, that would have been his right. If he owned ALL of the oil and said he wasn't going to give ANY away, that would be his right too. We do not have a right to someone else's goods; we are not entitled.

"I guess it is not possible for Soros to do ANYTHING at all with his own money that would be negative for the nation."

I never said that, that's your view. I never said that all wealthy people are wealthy legitimately. You're just changing the subject now. I was talking about antitrust, which is a fiction for anti-capitalists to use to control what they can't create on their own.