You historical knowlage is just wrong here. In fact the 'foundation' of anti-trust has changed a lot since Standard Oil and the Progressive 'Trust Busters'. We

You historical knowlage is just wrong here. In fact the 'foundation' of anti-trust has changed a lot since Standard Oil and the Progressive 'Trust Busters'. We have since realized that Anti-Trust in the Progressive period basically was applied with very little oversight and it was not applied consistantly. It was basically a way for politicans to go after the competition of their funders. This part of Anti-Trust history is often ignored in the glorifited 'Progessives fight evil capitalists'-story that is now so popular with the modern progressives. Under the new rules, that the judges (specifically Richard Posner) came up with you actually have to show consumers were harmed. And since then all Anti-Trust cases are judged according to that criteria. And unsurprisingly the amount of Anti-Trust conviction has gone to basically nothing. Standard Oil being case and point, during Standard Oil the oil price consistantly went down and the quality improved. The people that ran amoke against it were not in fact the poor consumers but rather local oil companies that were getting their ass handed to them by Standard Oil. They simply could not compete with the price or the quality.