This implied threat, so to speak, prevents potential monopolists from acting erratically or to great detriment of consumers. Even when it seems as if a monopoly is beginning to form, the threat of competition – of some market share being taken back from the monopolist – lingers. We should inquire, further, to what degree market competition actually is suppressed or converted into other forms.”Ĭompetition is a fluid constant within the free market. … Therefore, when market competition seems to have been suppressed, we should inquire what has become of the forces by which it was generated. Why this misconception continues to stand against all reason remains unapparent, but only one conclusion is for certain: harmful monopolies cannot form under a free market.Ĭompetition “regulates“ the actions of producers, so harmful monopolies cannot form amongst them like many are led to believe.įranklin Giddings elaborates: “…competition in some form is a permanent economic process. Mike Holly explains: “For more than three centuries, most of America has aimlessly suffered through disguised, evolving and perverse forms of authoritarian economies created with government policies favoring monopolies and ineffective regulation: mercantilism before 1900, then socialism until the 1970s, and corporatism since.” Such claims are especially ironic because the solution they pose to this non-issue – government intervention – oftentimes results in the very outcome they intend to prevent in the first place. ![]() Claims of free market monopolies potentially arising are spouted relentlessly at advocates of free markets, and are often upheld despite elaboration to the contrary. Regardless, many people fervently defend this fabrication. ![]() Thomas DiLorenzo summarizes this economic principle as follows: “The enduring forces of competition - including potential competition - will render free-market monopoly an impossibility.” The most principled economists largely agree that harmful free-market monopolies simply cannot occur. ![]() This notion, coming straight from the Australian government themselves, is a glaring example of the economic illiteracy plaguing the minds – and pockets – of society.Īre monopolies possible in a free market? This may occur when there is a monopoly, or a small number of sellers can limit supply in the absence of substitutes or maintain prices higher than would occur in a competitive market.” “Regulation may be justified where uncompetitive market structures or anti-competitive conduct lead to inefficient outcomes in the economy. In fact, propagators of this falsehood often ignore the fact that it is governments who create monopolies, oftentimes at the expense of the very consumers who fund their maintenance through the taxes they pay. To make such a claim is to deny basic economic principles, evidenced both logically through theoretical frameworks as well as historically through past examples of attempted monopolization. Far too many individuals (and politically motivated groups, as well) are pushing the narrative that government intervention in the economy is essential to prevent predacious corporations from taking over entire industries, and using their monopoly power to financially harm consumers indefinitely thereafter. ![]() Society must understand that “natural monopoly” is not the economic boogeyman it seems to think it is.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |