Should the Wall street journal........

[theworldismine13]

How is a newstory not a supply?

The WSJ doesnt have to have exclusive possesion of the entire supply of newstories and/or the entire trade of selling newspapers. If they have ONE news stories that no other news source has, they have a monopoly on that one story.

its funny you say i dont understand the word supply or trade while at the same time showing that you dont understand it.

Your analogy is stupid. What im saying is equivalent to saying that cash money (or whoever they are in contract with) has a monopoly on the songs they produce...............which they do.

yeah but A song is not the supply or the trade of the music industry, cash money has a copyright on the songs they produce they dont have a monopoly, just like the WSJ has a copyright on their stories and they do not have monopoly of the news industry

and yes you do have to have control over the entire supply or the entire trade for it to be a monopoly, do you not know how to read your own definition?

"the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service."

it says it quite clearly that for it to be monopoly it would have to have EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION OR CONTROL of THE SUPPLY"

controlling an entire industry is a monopoly
controlling a song or newstory is a copyright

capish?

 

[JasonSJackson]

yeah but A song is not the supply or the trade of the music industry....

this is where i stopped reading

Did i say a song was the supply or the trade of the music industry?

I said they have a monopoly on the songs they produce NOT THE MUSIC INDUSTRY. They could choose to ride around selling the songs they produce out the trunk of their cars for 100 dollars a whop..............1000 even.......why because they have (or whoever they are in contract with) have a monopoly on those tracks. They could make the greatest songs ever made and then simply delete them without a single soul being allowed to hear them...............why BECAUSE THEY HAVE A MONOPOLY on those songs!

they have "the exclusive possession or control of the supply [of that] commodity"

the commodity being the songs they produce

I really shouldnt even have to explain this to you........

 

[ill]

this is where i stopped reading

Did i say a song was the supply or the trade of the music industry?

I said they have a monopoly on the songs they produce NOT THE MUSIC INDUSTRY. They could choose to ride around selling the songs they produce out the trunk of their cars for 100 dollars a whop..............1000 even.......why because they have (or whoever they are in contract with) have a monopoly on those tracks. They could make the greatest songs ever made and then simply delete them without a single soul being allowed to hear them...............why BECAUSE THEY HAVE A MONOPOLY on those songs!

they have "the exclusive possession or control of the supply [of that] commodity"

the commodity being the songs they produce

I really shouldnt even have to explain this to you........

You said in an earlier post that WSJ has a "supply" of one article that you can't access because you're broke. So by your own definition of the word, a song IS a supply of the music industry.

 

[Kritic]

this nicca "stops reading" other ppls posts then gives his opinion based on the same post he just "ignored".

 

[JasonSJackson]

You said in an earlier post that WSJ has a "supply" of one article that you can't access because you're broke. So by your own definition of the word, a song IS a supply of the music industry.

another example of your poor comprehension skills at work.

I said that the wall street journal has a monopoly on the articles it posts that arent available anywhere else.......not one article.

And even if i did say it has a monopoly on ONE article that analogy you made still doesnt match up with the statement.

Youre stupid, its clear.

Youre also mad, lol........thats clear too.

 

[JasonSJackson]

this nicca "stops reading" other ppls posts then gives his opinion based on the same post he just "ignored".

its called being intelligent enough to know exactly where that off track post was headed without wasting my time walking on the track

I didnt read anywhere past where i quoted............

If my post perfectly responds to the rest of the foolishness u wrote........

dam im good

 

[ill]

another example of your poor comprehension skills at work.

I said that the wall street journal has a monopoly on the articles it posts that arent available anywhere else.......not one article.

And even if i did say it has a monopoly on ONE article that analogy you made still doesnt match up with the statement.

Youre stupid, its clear.

Youre also mad, lol........thats clear too.

Do you even read your own posts or are you a master troller? When @Kritic calls you out on being a troll and I actually have to give him daps, then you know you fukked up.

 

[Kritic]

you're not nice at all.

i'll let you know what's going on.
bottom line is the jewish kabal in wall street want you to pay for the little information they want you to know. if you want to know a few minutes before everyone else then you gotta pay for it.
it doesn't change the fact that they're still lying to you and will take your money eventually.

 

[JasonSJackson]

Do you even read your own posts or are you a master troller? When @Kritic calls you out on being a troll and I actually have to give him daps, then you know you fukked up.

whats the point of your post?

Are you that stupid that you cant grasp the fact that i first stated that I didnt say what you claim i did........and then went on to show you that your misquote STILL made the point i made.

You're an idiot.

 

[ill]

whats the point of your post?

Are you that stupid that you cant grasp the fact that i first stated that I didnt say what you claim i did........and then went on to show you that your misquote STILL made the point i made.

You're not smart.

Let me tell you that I'm very offended by your comments, friend. Especially the comments relating to my intelligence level. Especially when you don't understand what a monopoly is or how a monopoly is used in the real world.

 

[theworldismine13]

this is where i stopped reading

Did i say a song was the supply or the trade of the music industry?

I said they have a monopoly on the songs they produce NOT THE MUSIC INDUSTRY. They could choose to ride around selling the songs they produce out the trunk of their cars for 100 dollars a whop..............1000 even.......why because they have (or whoever they are in contract with) have a monopoly on those tracks. They could make the greatest songs ever made and then simply delete them without a single soul being allowed to hear them...............why BECAUSE THEY HAVE A MONOPOLY on those songs!

they have "the exclusive possession or control of the supply [of that] commodity"

the commodity being the songs they produce

I really shouldnt even have to explain this to you........

you can't simply insert [of that] in the definition, you are clearly fabricating things

the definition of monopoly is straightforward

"the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service."

if you do not control THE SUPPLY or THE TRADE then you do not have a monopoly, its that simply, its very cut and dry, the WSJ does not control THE SUPPLY or THE TRADE of newstories, therefore they do not have a monopoly

inserting 'of that' just exposed you, stop embarrassing yourself

 

[Kritic]

i'm not a troll.. it's truth with a style with a little sum sum. the gist is all true. like all medicine it has a label and it's not to appeal to jewish ppl.

 

[JasonSJackson]

you can't simply insert [of that] in the definition, you are clearly fabricating things

the definition of monopoly is straightforward

"the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service."

if you do not control THE SUPPLY or THE TRADE then you do not have a monopoly, its that simply, its very cut and dry, the WSJ does not control THE SUPPLY or THE TRADE of newstories, therefore they do not have a monopoly

inserting 'of that' just exposed you, stop embarrassing yourself

No more of my time will be wasted conversing with. Thank u for teaching me the folly in attempting to inform a fool.

 

[theworldismine13]

No more of my time will be wasted conversing with. Thank u for teaching me the folly in attempting to inform a fool.

you're welcome

 

[NZA]

i think someone beat this guy with a rolled up newspaper when he was a toddler or something. if bytchassness were a commodity, there would be a strong antitrust case against him