Would capitalists and socialists both be happy with stricter anti-trust legislation?

like, maxing out allowed employees at 200, which would create thousands of new companies, with thousands of new owners, which would beef up the middle-class.Would capitalists and socialists both be happy with stricter anti-trust legislation?I think your example of 200 employees is pretty extreme. I'd just like to see anti-trust legislation enforced to the same standards that were originally envisioned by Teddy Roosevelt in the early 1900s, and that no single company should control more than 25% of any market.Would capitalists and socialists both be happy with stricter anti-trust legislation?
I think capitalists generally benefit from trusts, and so would not be happy. They might consider it regulation which would not be needed when industry and the free market can regulate itself.Would capitalists and socialists both be happy with stricter anti-trust legislation?For what purpose would you limit the number of employees at a company to 200?



You know, one person can start 5 companies, employ 200 at each and get around your limit.Would capitalists and socialists both be happy with stricter anti-trust legislation?
200 people could never build a Ford automobile. You'd be putting us back to the level of shopkeepers in Bangladesh. You need big companies to do big things.Would capitalists and socialists both be happy with stricter anti-trust legislation?Sounds like the Equalization of Opportunity Act from ATLAS SHRUGGED; and if you've read the book, you know how that turned out.Would capitalists and socialists both be happy with stricter anti-trust legislation?
this question should be asked after ATT buys out Verizon and has a wireless monopoly..



Unlimited data and texting.. WTF is that? Oh yeah.. those lucky dudes had that back in 2011!