3 ms·
No. That's about recognizing there would be no mean reversion, a great indicative of the existence of crony monopolies and, therefore, lack of capitalism.
by financedfuture 11y ago
No.
That's about recognizing there would be no mean reversion, a great indicative of the existence of crony monopolies and, therefore, lack of capitalism.
- nitrogen 11y agoHow can capitalism result in anything other than crony monopolies?
- jazzyk 11y agoThe government _not_ hand-picking winners and losers (bailouts, lobbyists, etc.) would be a good start.
- Umn44 11y agoThe problem is this is a fantasy historically ,the government works for the rich (capitalists) its a capitalist government. Copyright law is a case in point. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act#/media/File:Copyright_term.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act#/...
- Hermel 11y agoIn the end, it boils down to whether firms in a given industry have increasing or decreasing returns to scale. For example, there are no hairdresser empires as this tends to be a profession that can already be operated efficiently at a small scale. Other sectors, especially those with high fixed costs, tend to produce monopolies.
- jbooth 11y agoYes, but it's also a huge indictment of "free market proponents" who tend to oppose any regulation, as it implies the need for muscular regulation of the market. In American political terms, calling it an indictment of 'capitalism' is a little imprecise but not really wrong.
- oldmanjay 11y agoIt's a bit hyperbolic to call it a huge indictment. Or in fact, an indictment at all. It's more like a mildly divergent opinion.