5 ms·

That misses about 95% of reality. To mention just one key factor: without government intervention you end up usually with a monopoly or oligopoly. Not to menti

That misses about 95% of reality. To mention just one key factor: without government intervention you end up usually with a monopoly or oligopoly. Not to mention safety standards, labour protection, quality and warranty, ... Without regulations and often intervention all goes to pieces. to directly counter your argument: no railroad ever developed without government intervention and at least funding, guarantees and land grants.

seibelj 4y ago
Can you name an example of a monopoly that has developed in the last 50 years that didn’t occur because of crony capitalism?
- nautilius 4y ago
  lock-the-spock explicitly writes about reality, and within the real system we have, monopolies develop.
  - nickff 4y ago
    The problem is that it’s difficult to distinguish whether the government caused the oligopoly, or is mitigating its (often deleterious) impacts.
- simonh 4y ago
  It very much depends what we agree monopoly means. Did Microsoft Windows have a monopoly on consumer desktop operating systems? Arguably Apple only survived because Microsoft bailed them out in 1997 to avoid being accused of having a monopoly. Does Google have a monopoly on search? Tech naturally tends towards monopolies because almost everyone benefits from using the same tech as everyone else they know. The same messaging system, the same operating system running the same applications that use the same file formats. As for crony capitalism as a source of monopolies, sure of course that can happen, but if we look away from capitalism basically the only other alternative anyone has come up with is pure unadulterated cronyism. Communism, socialism, they all end up being pure cronyist monopoly systems. At least with capitalism you have an outside chance of getting away from that.
- baq 4y ago
  > 50 years The three main U.S. antitrust statutes are the Sherman Act of 1890, the Clayton Act of 1914, and the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914. so yeah, you won't find many, because the regulation works.
kylevedder 4y ago
>without government intervention you end up usually with a monopoly or oligopoly. I would love to hear your explanation of how government intervention is the only thing preventing a monopoly or oligopoly of plumbers, electricians, pet groomers, or halal carts.
- baq 4y ago
  no explanation needed, just look at medieval history where guilds had de facto monopolies on certain services or manufacturing and if you wanted to be independent... tough luck.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > where guilds had de facto monopolies on certain services or manufacturing and if you wanted to be independent... tough luck This conflates too many historical threads to support the hypothesis. The guild era was one where most countries required official consent to start a business of any kind. That's how the guilds enforced their monopoly.
xyzzyz 4y ago
You seem to have noticed the part where the parent comment says “don’t regulate”, but missed the part where it says “if the market will naturally fix itself”. Please, read it again, so that you can respond to what it actually says, instead of what your imagined version of it says.
rufus_foreman 4y ago
Unless you are claiming that there are no issues that don't need government regulations, I don't see how your argument contradicts the parent post.
Bloating 4y ago
natural monopolies are short-term, unless propped up by government being propped up includes excessive copyright protections At one time, Walmart and Microsoft were considered by some to be "natural monopolies".
- rufus_foreman 4y ago
  >> At one time, Walmart and Microsoft were considered by some to be "natural monopolies". Natural monopoly: "A natural monopoly is a monopoly in an industry in which high infrastructural costs and other barriers to entry relative to the size of the market give the largest supplier in an industry, often the first supplier in a market, an overwhelming advantage over potential competitors" Newspaper headline, 1962: "Can Tiny Wal-Mart Survive Against the Big Guys?" Obviously, by Betteridge's law of headlines, Wal-Mart does not exist. Which is correct, since it is Walmart now. (The Big Guys were Woolco, Kmart and Target. There are 21 Kmarts left in the US. I have no idea what Woolco was. Oh OK, looked it up, Woolworths.)
darksaints 4y ago
You could just as easily say that government causes 95% of monopolies. Regulatory compliance is almost universally a fixed cost to a business, and large fixed cost structures are the defining characteristic of a natural monopoly market. That's also the reason why small public IPOs disappeared after Sarbox...small corporations can't handle the cost of regulatory compliance. Regulation can prevent monopolies, but it can just as easily enable them. And lack of regulation can allow monopolies to form, but they can also allow markets to commoditize. Quality of regulation will always matter more than quantity.
houstonn 4y ago
Corporations secure their standing through regulation. It prohibits upstarts from competing because of artificial overhead that only the largest and most well-connected (to government insiders) can handle. It's practically dragging the ladder up behind them.

seibelj 4y ago

Can you name an example of a monopoly that has developed in the last 50 years that didn’t occur because of crony capitalism?

nautilius 4y ago
lock-the-spock explicitly writes about reality, and within the real system we have, monopolies develop.
- nickff 4y ago
  The problem is that it’s difficult to distinguish whether the government caused the oligopoly, or is mitigating its (often deleterious) impacts.
simonh 4y ago
It very much depends what we agree monopoly means. Did Microsoft Windows have a monopoly on consumer desktop operating systems? Arguably Apple only survived because Microsoft bailed them out in 1997 to avoid being accused of having a monopoly. Does Google have a monopoly on search? Tech naturally tends towards monopolies because almost everyone benefits from using the same tech as everyone else they know. The same messaging system, the same operating system running the same applications that use the same file formats. As for crony capitalism as a source of monopolies, sure of course that can happen, but if we look away from capitalism basically the only other alternative anyone has come up with is pure unadulterated cronyism. Communism, socialism, they all end up being pure cronyist monopoly systems. At least with capitalism you have an outside chance of getting away from that.
baq 4y ago
> 50 years The three main U.S. antitrust statutes are the Sherman Act of 1890, the Clayton Act of 1914, and the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914. so yeah, you won't find many, because the regulation works.

kylevedder 4y ago

>without government intervention you end up usually with a monopoly or oligopoly. I would love to hear your explanation of how government intervention is the only thing preventing a monopoly or oligopoly of plumbers, electricians, pet groomers, or halal carts.

baq 4y ago
no explanation needed, just look at medieval history where guilds had de facto monopolies on certain services or manufacturing and if you wanted to be independent... tough luck.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > where guilds had de facto monopolies on certain services or manufacturing and if you wanted to be independent... tough luck This conflates too many historical threads to support the hypothesis. The guild era was one where most countries required official consent to start a business of any kind. That's how the guilds enforced their monopoly.

xyzzyz 4y ago

You seem to have noticed the part where the parent comment says “don’t regulate”, but missed the part where it says “if the market will naturally fix itself”. Please, read it again, so that you can respond to what it actually says, instead of what your imagined version of it says.

rufus_foreman 4y ago

Unless you are claiming that there are no issues that don't need government regulations, I don't see how your argument contradicts the parent post.

Bloating 4y ago

natural monopolies are short-term, unless propped up by government being propped up includes excessive copyright protections At one time, Walmart and Microsoft were considered by some to be "natural monopolies".

rufus_foreman 4y ago
>> At one time, Walmart and Microsoft were considered by some to be "natural monopolies". Natural monopoly: "A natural monopoly is a monopoly in an industry in which high infrastructural costs and other barriers to entry relative to the size of the market give the largest supplier in an industry, often the first supplier in a market, an overwhelming advantage over potential competitors" Newspaper headline, 1962: "Can Tiny Wal-Mart Survive Against the Big Guys?" Obviously, by Betteridge's law of headlines, Wal-Mart does not exist. Which is correct, since it is Walmart now. (The Big Guys were Woolco, Kmart and Target. There are 21 Kmarts left in the US. I have no idea what Woolco was. Oh OK, looked it up, Woolworths.)

darksaints 4y ago

You could just as easily say that government causes 95% of monopolies. Regulatory compliance is almost universally a fixed cost to a business, and large fixed cost structures are the defining characteristic of a natural monopoly market. That's also the reason why small public IPOs disappeared after Sarbox...small corporations can't handle the cost of regulatory compliance. Regulation can prevent monopolies, but it can just as easily enable them. And lack of regulation can allow monopolies to form, but they can also allow markets to commoditize. Quality of regulation will always matter more than quantity.

houstonn 4y ago

Corporations secure their standing through regulation. It prohibits upstarts from competing because of artificial overhead that only the largest and most well-connected (to government insiders) can handle. It's practically dragging the ladder up behind them.