From: Steve Grammont (islander@midmaine.com)
Date: Tue Aug 26 2003 - 13:47:44 PDT
>I just read Steve's post and can say that while he makes a few good points
>about how an item is priced in relation to future liabilities and
anticipated
>use, he has yet to realize that the concept of a mandate in perpetuity
has no
>lawful basis beyond the auspices of a covenant, and as such has an
expiration
>date, expressed or not.The 1/8th price contract stipulations limiting resale
>would become un-enforceable in a matter of time.
> Sort of like selling a Humvee for "off road use".
Anything is enforcable if both parties agree to the terms and those terms
are in and of themselves legal. I would be interested in a relevant case
which shows that one party can break the terms of a covenant whenever it
feels that it should no longer apply to itself. It might become defacto
un-enforceable at some point, but that is likely only because of the
crappy legal system we have (i.e. VERY high costs to get anything done).
>Perhaps Steve also has yet to learn that the Government does not do business
>based on a bottom line as defined in a traditional business model.
I think you have more to learn about how corporations work than I about
how governements work ;-) Because...
>Money
>earned is not saved, money saved is not kept, money kept is subtracted
>from next years budget.
This is in fact how big business works. There is a reason my family
business sees huge spikes in sales at the end of every quarter and a HUGE
one at the end of the customer's fiscal year. If they don't spend their
allocation, it makes it harder to ask for the same money next year, even
if they project a real need for it. And of course it makes asking for an
increase even harder.
Government is nothing more than a big business when you boil it down.
And looking at Eron and other businesses, it is surprisingly well run
for its size.
Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:23:38 PDT