All together now...CHARGE!!!

Why is that funny? You and I may not agree with it, but it's a pretty well presented piece.
Or is that just how one gets to 5,000 posts?

 

Rutten writes with no understanding of antitrust law whatsoever. You don't get an antitrust waiver because you're going to make things more expensive for consumers. These examples aren't comparable:

When the nation's first Postal Act was passed in 1792, it not only continued Franklin's and Hunter's policy of free transmission of papers between printers but set a heavily subsidized postal rate of a single cent on copies mailed to subscribers. In 1851, Congress granted free postage to weekly papers mailed within their counties of origin and later extended the subsidy to dailies.

These are subsidies, not a waiving of antitrust (which I don't believe existed then, at least not as we know it). Anyway, these had the benefit of giving newspapers a break and giving consumers a break, as well, because it made it cheaper and easier to get them the news.

 

That wasn't his point. Or, I didn't take it that way.
With that paragraph, he's showing precedent of Congressional interjection.

 

I'm all for it. We have to do something different.