Originally Posted by Josh Z
Not when that company has a monopoly, because it has abused the free market to unfairly destroy all legitimate competition. Like, again, Enron.
The only monopolies that are established and maintained
are those that are mandated and enforced by government
, such as utility monopolies. Citing Enron (which wound up imploding) only serves to prove the point. And as I pointed out, they were as much interested in political influence peddling (hardly a market activity) as anything else.
As for "unfairly destroying all legitimate competition" via market activities (and only
market activities), why all the concern for failed competitors? What really
matters is how well a business is able to satisfy customers, and if one or more businesses are able to do that better than others, why shouldn't they succeed? As I pointed out in the Standard Oil case, prices FELL by 80 percent as their market share grew. Why not focus on THAT, rather than worrying about their "poor competitors"? Honestly, antitrust law is rather crazy.
When an antitrust case was brought against the Alcoa Aluminum Company, prosecutors sat there and said how horrible the company was for doing everything in its power to lower the price of aluminum as much as possible
. What sane person thinks like that? Certainly no one who cares about consumers. It only makes sense if one realizes the true
motive, which is government people bought and paid for by companies trying to achieve via "laws" what they can't achieve in the marketplace.
Did we really learn nothing at all from the Great Depression?
The myth about the Great Depression is that it was caused by some "flaw" in an utterly free marketplace. Quite the contrary, it was caused by quite extensive (and poorly done) fiscal and monetary interventions on the part of the Federal Government, including the Federal Reserve, as well as extremely high tariffs imposed by the Smoot-Hawley Act. Ironically, the primary justification for the Fed's existence was to prevent such things from happening. The Fed hardly has a stellar record in this regard.
Suggested reading on this topic: America's Great Depression
, by Murray Rothbard.
If you look at most "free market" economies around the world, there's plenty of government intervention (the lack of which is one of the defining characteristics of a free market.) The difference is, the intervention is on the side of the corporations/producers, and not the citizens/consumers.
That's true. The irony is that some examples people like to point to of the "failure" of the free market are actually examples of the failures of the corporate state.Edited by RobertR - 7/2/13 at 4:30pm