Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

'Interesting Point Of View'

Rate this topic


Praxus

Recommended Posts

My teacher claimed that the monoplies exsisted because of Laissiez Faire. Then I accuratly pointed out to him that not a single monopoly in US History exsisted without the backing of the Government. I aksed him to name one, so he told me of course "Standard Oil". Then I pointed out that the max "market share" that standard oil ever had was 88% and that Standard Oil cut prices significantly. I also pointed out that they only had a 64% market share at the time of the Anti-Trust case. I further went on to explain that the Anti-Trusts laws were created by the politicians because they got paid off by the companies that couldn't compete.

Then he goes on to say that the Government through it's railroad supsidies helped us expand west because he said it was the only entity that had enough money to do it. Then I tell him about James J. Hill and how he built the Great Northern better, quicker, and cheaper then the supsidised railways.

So he said "It was an interesting point of view".

What the heck? It's not a point of a view, they are facts!

What is it with teachers today?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My teacher claimed that the monoplies exsisted because of Laissiez Faire. Then I accuratly pointed out to him that not a single monopoly in US History exsisted without the backing of the Government. I aksed him to name one, so he told me of course "Standard Oil". Then I pointed out that the max "market share" that standard oil ever had was 88% and that Standard Oil cut prices significantly. I also pointed out that they only had a 64% market share at the time of the Anti-Trust case. I further went on to explain that the Anti-Trusts laws were created by the politicians because they got paid off by the companies that couldn't compete.

Then he goes on to say that the Government through it's railroad supsidies helped us expand west because he said it was the only entity that had enough money to do it. Then I tell him about James J. Hill and how he built the Great Northern better, quicker, and cheaper then the supsidised railways.

So he said "It was an interesting point of view".

What the heck? It's not a point of a view, they are facts!

What is it with teachers today?

It is a matter of principles. You can argue the concrete instances -- Standard Oil, railroads, etc. -- until you both turn blue in the face, but I suspect that your real differences are the fundamental principles that you hold. The place to begin is by defining what a monopoly is, and relating the concept to the use of force. You then differentiate this from the free market. I doubt that your teacher really grasps what a free market is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a matter of principles. You can argue the concrete instances -- Standard Oil, railroads, etc. -- until you both turn blue in the face, but I suspect that your real differences are the fundamental principles that you hold. The place to begin is by defining what a monopoly is, and relating the concept to the use of force. You then differentiate this from the free market. I doubt that your teacher really grasps what a free market is.

I've had this debate before, with an Anti-Trust lawyer. Using the method you describe, I was able to get my antagonist to concede my point. Just as I was filling up with the satisfaction of my accomplishment, he said, "Yeah, but what about IBM?" :lol:

People who can't, or won't, grasp what a principle is must wake up in a new "everything's relative" world everyday. I don't understand how they do it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing wrong with a monopoly in a truly free market. That just means that one company was far superior to it's competitors. So I am wondering why you tried to argue against him in the first place?

It's the CONCEPT itself which is disputable. Monopoly is usually defined as a market or part of a market reserved to ONE seller in a given region. This definition invalid, not to mention very elastic, for depending upon how narrowly one defines a given "good" and a given "region", it may be that EVERY market is a monopoly or that THERE NEVER WAS a monopoly.

Properly, it should be defined as a market or part of a market reserved to the exclusive possession of one or more sellers by law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Properly, it should be defined as a market or part of a market reserved to the exclusive possession of one or more sellers by law.

Yes I agree. The only legitimate definition of monopoly is one which connects the firm's market dominance to coercive government action; ie utilities, or the Post Office. Standard Oil, Microsoft, etc were never monopolies. Some free market commentators will refer to them as "natural monopolies", but I don't like that term either. They were (and are) excellent companies that built up market dominance through superior products and management.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the CONCEPT itself which is disputable.  Monopoly is usually defined as a market or part of a market reserved to ONE seller in a given region.  This definition invalid, not to mention very elastic, for depending upon how narrowly one defines a given "good" and a given "region", it may be that EVERY market is a monopoly or that THERE NEVER WAS a monopoly. 

Properly, it should be defined as a market or part of a market reserved to the exclusive possession of one or more sellers by law.

Excellent points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...