You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Does Competition Really Guarantee a Monopoly?
Ok..I think I am understanding you. However, with or without government it seems that a monopoly would occur. Once somebody gains an advantage that allows them to gain financial power over others they then have the ability to create a monopoly. If there was no government at all, somebody would soon rise to the top to control all others. In my view government is the only thing that can prevent a monopoly through regulation. However, it is only able to do this if it designed in a way to prevent its own capture.
How would this occur? In order to gain such power, the company would need it be massive. And with size comes inefficiency and waste. That is why the costs need to be externalized through government enforcement.
Government regulation guarantees regulatory capture and cronyism. They go hand-in-hand. It is the problem masquerading as the solution. Government is as susceptible to the same greed and power thirst you see in corporate CEOs, but completely divorced from any of the economic restraints of the market.
Remember, the government is by definition a territorial monopoly in violence. Everything the government has, it acquires through extortion and fraud. Even the most corrupt companies still need to provide goods and services people choose to purchase, but government merely plunders.
I believe the East India Company is a good example. I think there are a handful of examples in which companies began operating in areas of little to no governance. As they grew in wealth and power through market dominance they began using that wealth and power to protect their monopoly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company
They were granted an exclusive government charter. The East India Company was one of the first government-backed monopolies.