It's quibbling, but I don't think that's correct. The charters for the colonies were from the king, and "taxation without representation" was not lobbying (mainly) to let the colonies into Parliament, but rather to assert that Parliament had no authority to impose taxes at all. The colonies were subject to the king directly (which is why the colonies like Virginia had their own House of Burgesses, etc)

I suspect he meant, "Could not measure it with a good scope, nor with a voltmeter ..."

Maybe the platters would be fine ... but wouldn't this destroy any (increasingly computerized) intelligence [which they hope to gather], too? If so, that makes it less likely to be used in a raid, but rather as the van[guard] of an attack.

Genetic Fallacy

... and the great logic fail is that "Unfair" should also be "Illegal"? What about when you buy a new TV on a Wednesday and miss out on the Black Friday deal? Was that fair to you? Shouldn't one assume that prices change, volume matters, etc? This is a perfect example of a "free", but not "perfect" market. Taking your specific case, you can no longer differentiate yourself via access to special data (say, airline routing and pricing data?), but rather have to supply an additional service. Welcome to the real world; the line forms to your left.

Really? Somehow I'm betting that non-free-market unions and a socialisticly-derived sense of entitlement have more to do with this behavior than "a free market competitive economy". I realize that my assertion is just as nakedly unsupported as yours, but I figured I needed to weigh in on the possibility that this got modded up as "Insightful" instead of "Informative".

If that were the problem, yes, but I don't think that it is.

Just looking at fractional reserve under-capitalization (due to criminally-negligent monetary policy), the concomitant fraud in how various mortgage-backed securities were represented, the fraudulent credit-default-swap over-selling, and the ongoing-now MLS fiasco, we're talking about massive, documented fraud for which not one person (to my knowledge ... ?) has gone to jail. Instead, they've all been encouraged via the moral hazard of the bailout and the current administration's pressure upon state Attorneys General to take a paltry sum and forego prosecution.

If the problem is a lack of laws, I'll support it; I just suggest that enforcement or repeal of existing laws would be more prudent ("don't legalize fraud or theft in the first place")

You've not realized as much you've thought then, my friend. Though, it is also true that most Americans haven't, either.

Rather than address the caricature ("crony capitalism"), I'll keep it simple: the free market is nothing more (or less) than a statement that groups of people are both untrustworthy (as individuals and in groups) and yet the only means of efficiently measuring the desires of other people.

So on two points the free market is held up in opposition-- not to government (in se), but to "Statism": (1) that all transactions should be done without violence and (2) central planning necessarily fails to accurately predict (a) pricing or (b) goods and quantities (as a function of failed pricing analysis). (1) is violated when the state compels one to (a) not do something one otherwise wants or (b) do something one would not otherwise do. (2) was largely proven by Mises, and does not imply that private entities are superior at the analysis or prediction, only that they care more due to the profit/loss requirements.

"Statism" looks to government as its god in the same way you broadly accuse Americans of looking to the idol of "Free Market". Us Paleo-Conservative minarchists (new word for the day) don't want government abolished-- we already agree we need it because evil exists, we just want it to operate in its proper sphere.The very crony capitalism/corporatism you despise is a function of the a state failure, not a market failure. You want a solution? It's not "Regulation" that's the answer, it's "Enforcement." We don't need any new laws, quotas, procedures, or double-check overhead to know that bad stuff gets done, and such things NEVER catch it beforehand. What we need is for our executive branches (not digging at POTUS, just the entire "law enforcement" segment of government) to have the stones to throw the cronies in jail. Don't blame the market for failures at the governmental level, and don't look to the already-failing bureaucrat for a solution

That's a false dichotomy. The choices are (1) give (some of) the UNvested shares back and don't get rich, or (2) get fired, forfeit all of the UNvested shares, and don't get rich. I hope the IPO punishes them for this.

This is undeniably true, but it comes from a rational fear of ice, too

There's a lot more daytime melt-and-refreeze once you get south of Virginia.

... and please hold the snarky comments about editing; I thought I reviewed it ... :) --> " ... with these programs being cheered on ..."

I'm sure there's an objective, non-sensationalist, just-the-facts reporter working somewhere, but to pretend that the internet is the reason these jobs are going away is silly. They're going away because the local reporting is, in the main, just as vacuous as national reporting and probably less well-edited. Factor in that with local reporting we're still getting more government waste, more local corruption, and less effective schools with these programs been cheered on by most of those in journalism, and this seems to boil down to "if that fox stops guarding the henhouse ..."

I agree that the Fourth Estate (right?) is important, but its value is historically overstated, and it is easily co-opted for outright propaganda.