Quote:
Originally Posted by HeHasReturned
Hold on though...Once you've established a monopoly, you pretty much control the industry. There are no competitors because simply put, they can't compete with you. Predatory monopoly just sounds like the stage before monopoly, the complete control of the industry.
Yes, monopolies can benefit consumers, but what about the small business-people? There is no room for growth/competition in the market because there is too dominant of a monopoly. If there is no room for competition, isn't that inherently against capitalism? Not to mention no room for growth is not beneficial to society in the long run.
One company in power is never a good thing.
|
Apparently you overestimate the power of a monopoly. Like in my previous post, competitors do arise again. Monopolies are only stable if they meet the consumers demand, and that's only if they can FOREVER keep competition that poses a threat from surfacing. The only way for it to keep competition from arising is under-cutting its price, but competition is always around the corner. These two facts combined would mean that the acting company would have to always undercut the prices of its competitors. This vastly benefits the consumer, but not the company in the least. In the short run, it is manageable. However, given a couple years the company in question starts to become unprofitable. It can only stay a company by making profits, and if it fails to do this investors will go elsewhere, only fueling the competition of this so called monopolized industry. In the situation of Standard Oil, the most famous accusation of being a monopoly, it sure didn't "control the industry" for long. In 1880, it had 90% market share, but by 1911 its market share has decreased to 65%.
Also, since you are against monopolies, why are you not contesting the government monopolies? For example, patents are a monopoly on ideas. It seems you are only against private monopolies, and you seem to put faith in a self-interested government forms of monopolies.