Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

A View of What's Left: a Tea Party
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Markets can and do create monopolies. The argument is that monopolies are difficult to sustain in a market economy. VQ, you should be sensitive to concentrations of wealth. Having a super-wealthy class of people who are able to buy government will not create or sustain a libertarian society.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
visitorq



Joined: 11 Jan 2008

PostPosted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheUrbanMyth wrote:
visitorq wrote:
[q. There is absolutely no way that free market capitalism results in any kind of monopoly. There is no such thing as a natural monopoly, only the government has the power to create monopolies through regulation...



visitorq wrote:
In a free market, a successful company can take take a very large segment of the market, but this never lasts.

.


Well most sources refer to Standard Oil as a monopoly. True it wasn't an absolute monopoly but with a near 90% share of the market at one point it might as well have been.

I agree that a successful company can take a very large share of the market but this never lasts. Well nothing lasts forever.

Standard Oil and Microsoft pioneered new products, which allowed them to have a giant market share simply because they were there first. This is fair play. There is absolutely no way to sustain this lead without either 1) continuing to make better, cheaper products (in which case there's no problem as the consumer benefits immensely) or 2) getting the government to pass regulation giving you an unfair advantage or straight-up gov't sanctioned monopoly.

Quote:
But that is different from saying the free market does not create monopolies. Whether they last or not is beside the point. At one point Microsoft was deemed a monopoly with a 90% share of the market (similar to Standard Oil).

Whether they last or not is not beside the point. The point is that they never last (at least there is no example in history of them ever lasting without government regulation propping them up).

Quote:
And this was a federal judge saying this.

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1040-232565.htm

That's fine - doesn't mean it's correct.

Quote:
And who's to say that if Microsoft and Standard Oil hadn't been broken up (as they would NOT have been in a totally free market) that they wouldn't have (respectively) kept/regained their dominance?

Standard Oil's market share had declined a great deal by the time it was broken up, as already mentioned.

Moreover, the so-called "monopoly" wasn't even really broken, it was just reformed into the same big oil companies we have today, who, with all the government regulation have a real, collective monopoly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
visitorq



Joined: 11 Jan 2008

PostPosted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mises wrote:
Markets can and do create monopolies.

If that's the case, could you name one?

Quote:
The argument is that monopolies are difficult to sustain in a market economy. VQ, you should be sensitive to concentrations of wealth. Having a super-wealthy class of people who are able to buy government will not create or sustain a libertarian society.

It may just be a matter of defining a "monopoly". For me having a majority market share at a given point in time (even 100%) is not a monopoly. A monopoly is the ability to charge monopoly prices for an indefinite period of time, and the consumer has no choice but to pay. The government has many monopolies of its own. Standard Oil and Microsoft both had/have competitors; the consumer could freely buy other products. Therefore they are not monopolies.

As for concentrations of wealth, I have no problem with that. Having a super-wealthy class is the result of government intervention, not the cause of it. I realize this could turn into a chicken/egg debate (pointless), but ultimately it makes no difference if the government just stops interfering.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International