Are monopolies so bad?
 

I can think of some reasons:

Monopolies are not beholden to market forces anymore since they have no competitors.

Bad customer service. The monopoly's customers and consumers have no recourse. They just get [censored] on.

The unchecked monopoly often produces dangerous, substandard products that we have no choice but to use.

Exploitation of the public at the expense of an elite few.

It leads to the monopoly having undue influence on the government.

The monopoly usually only achieves monopoly status by recruiting government to create an unfair environment through regulation, taxation, subsidy, or outright prohibition of competitors' products.

Only the extremely wealthy can afford to consume the expensive alternatives, the poor must take whatever the monopoly offers.

Special interests that are tied to the monopoly get special protections.

Any others?

natedogg

Re: Are monopolies so bad?
 

You damn dirty Socialist.

Re: Are monopolies so bad?
 

I can't wait to see where this goes!

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Are monopolies so bad?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The monopoly usually only achieves monopoly status by recruiting government to create an unfair environment through regulation, taxation, subsidy, or outright prohibition of competitors' products.

[/ QUOTE ]

Delete "usually" and you've got it right.

Re: Are monopolies so bad?
 

first time I've ever agreed with pvn - it'll probably be the last, but what the hell.

RB

Re: Are monopolies so bad?
 

Monopolies create a dead weight loss.

Monopolies waste resources in order to achieve and maintain their monopoly (kind of covered in your points).

-ptmusic

Re: Are monopolies so bad?
 

It's pretty clear that monopolies are one of the major problems with unrestricted capitalisim, but not all monopolies have to be bad...

there are certian industries, such as telecom, energy, defense, etc, that are 'natural monopolies'- areas where free market forces don't really encourage competition that benifits both the business and the consumer, mostly because of logistical forces and infrastructure/capital requirments... service and product improves as competition diminishes, but when the monopoly is in place, the incentive to provide good products and services disappears...

some countries try to control this through regulation, some socialist nations handle it by nationalizing those industries... neither solution is complete, as regulation is complicated and expensive, and government isn't always that efficient [/understatment].


I'd like to hear your thoughts on natural monopolies and how to handle them, natedogg.

Re: Are monopolies so bad?
 

I loved Ma Bell. Their phones were indestructible and were classic in form and function, the service was very reliable, the price for phone service was structured so that most could afford some semblance of service, which including being on a party line. I was very disappointed when this mother of phone service was broke up.

The other great thing about monopolies is the way they consolidated power, which has a way of provoking conflict. Though beneficial in opening up territory, many looked upon the railroads as a menace especially in prices paid to get commodities to market. This helped to promote criminal activities, tact support for scoundrels, and the formation of the Pinkertons. Society benefits from this unfettered display of violence and economic brutality.

Monopolies help to create an unbalance in economic systems and thus promote innovation in response. Monoliths eventually become uninventive and lax and inherent inertia slows their usefulness and productivity. But this minor drawback is offset by the marriage of economic power to the political process, which creates oligarchic blocks within and between countries that are always in tension. Eventually this can foster and promote wars. Many wars, though promoted as defensive moves and as patriotic protection, have offensive economic foundations and incentives.

The dominant benefit of all this is that vast quantities of the throbbing masses are lathered into a frenzy by useful propaganda spewed out by numerous demagogues. The inevitable conflict reduces the population, which is slaughtered in heaps for dubious benefits that they will never personally realize, or for future promises that they will never receive and only a fool would believe to begin with. Once the conflict cleans out the gutters of humanity of sufficient trash and the orgy of violence naturally slows and dies, a collected breath is exhaled. This restores some balance to the human system and after a period of indolent peace and boring quiescence, natural unbalance is again built up in the system and the cycle is repeated.

Thus monopolies are not only good, they are necessary and provide a benefit to humanity.

Le Misanthrope

Re: Are monopolies so bad?
 

remind me never to visit your country - unless it's the Netherlands.

RB

Re: Are monopolies so bad?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's pretty clear that monopolies are one of the major problems with unrestricted capitalisim,

[/ QUOTE ]

No, in fact, monopolies are one of the problems of regulated and govt-subsidized capitalism.