[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't this seem like a logical extension of anti-trust?

I go to my neighbor and inform him that he MUST sell his car, within the week. I tell him the reason is that by not selling his car he is keeping the price of '03 Honda Civics high and I have deemed that keeping the price of '03 Honda Civics low is in the publics best interest. I tell him that for every week that he doesn't sell his car he must pay me $1000, and if he doesn't, I'm going to come over there and shoot him.

1. Is this acceptable behavior on my part?

2. Is there a non-arbitrary difference between this and our various anti-trust prosecutions? eg Microsoft, DeBeers, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. No.

2. Yes. Your neighbor did not accept licenses and other benefits from you that oblige him to own the car only on your terms within those territories over which you have sovereignty by legal right.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you implying that the act of engaging in free enterprise is a "benefit" from government?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, if you are doing so on the sovereign territory of the party for whom the government in question is acting as fiduciary.