Skip to comments. America Has a Monopoly Problem—and It’s Huge
Posted on 09/16/2018 8:58:27 PM PDT by MagillaX
The Nobel Prize winner argues that an economy dominated by large corporations has failed the many and enriched the few
There is much to be concerned about in America today: a growing political and economic divide, slowing growth, decreasing life expectancy, an epidemic of diseases of despair. The unhappiness that is apparent has taken an ugly turn, with an increase in protectionism and nativism. Trumps diagnosis, which blames outsiders, is wrong, as are the prescriptions that follow.
This is an edited version of his talk delivered at "Does America Have a Monopoly Problem," co-hosted by the Roosevelt Institute and the George Washington Institute of Public Policy on September 25, 2017, in Washington, DC.
But we have to ask: Is there an underlying problem that can and must be addressed?
There is a widespread sense of powerlessness, both in our economic and political life. We seem no longer to control our own destinies. If we dont like our Internet company or our cable TV, we either have no place to turn, or the alternative is no better. Monopoly corporations are the primary reason that drug prices in the United States are higher than anywhere else in the world. Whether we like it or not, a company like Equifax can gather data about us, and then blithely take insufficient cybersecurity measures, exposing half the country to the risk of identity fraud, and then charge us for but a partial restoration of the security that we had before a major breach.
America is governed by cartels who are run with approval of Fed.gov
Let’s start with Faecesbook, Twatter, D’Appled, Goolag, and Microsucks.
Banking: Bank Of America
JP Morgan Chase
Music: Sony Publishing
Radio: Clear Channel
Print: Time Warner
I’ve read that Walmart has actually been losing some market share to Dollar General. DG has pursued a successful business model in opening locations in very small towns that are attractive alternatives to a long drive to Walmart for customers who are looking for some basic everyday items.
Same thing for telephone access, all swallowed up by AT&T, which was broken up into smaller Bells, which then merged and got monopolized again. But with cellular, we again have choices (although few).
We had few choices in Television content, with only a few choices you could count on your hand. Now we have many. How is that a monopoly?
As for drug prices, R&D is expensive and must be covered by initial pricing before protections expire and other companies are allowed to clone them without any R&D expense. The high pricing is not because of any monopoly, it is an expense to be covered as no one develops a product for free.
I don't think America really does have a monopoly problem: once great companies like GM, GE and Sears are in trouble. You can hate Apple and Walmart, but they have been innovators. When they stop being ahead of the curve, or when they misjudge their opportunities, they will go the way of older companies that fell from a position of predominance.
Many novel prize winners are leftist morons.
“...protectionism and nativism...” COUNT ME IN!
You forgot Kaiser, Signa, Aetna, etc... Health care and periferal diagnostics and support is the worst.
Which reminds me, when does the McDonalds Monopoly Game start?
The power to regulate begets the power to regulate corruptly. Governmental solutions are at best clumsy, inefficient, and ineffective, and at worst, criminally corrupt.
I don't think anti-trust applies in many of these cases.
If a company comes to dominate and industry by being better, faster and more competitive than others that is not a violation.
If it buys others and absorbs them, that may be a violation.
15 years ago, the claim was that Walmart was going to monopolize retail. Today, Amazon came from nowhere and is now leading.
The Facebook category didn't exist 20 years ago. Nor did Google.
Apple has never dominated any industry--no monopoly there.
Nothing is more monopolistic than having a protected market that prevents competition from oversea drug importations. .Gov effectively limits the importations of drugs to the benefit of drug companies.
The price stranglehold will eventually bring forth even more 'socialism' to the US if it isn't stopped.
Are you contesting my statement of fact that R&D is expensive and must be covered? No one develops a product for free, and there must be protections against piracy. Oversea drug marketers rip off the originators of drugs. I have no qualms about free markets. But I do believe piracy must be stopped. The Chinese and others blatantly copy products without trying to invent the products themselves. This is something President Trump is trying to prevent. Competition is good, but piracy is bad.
The problem is when the monopolies are in bed with the government.
Do not they get the returns back here? Isn't that part of the problem. They 'choose' to sell overseas. It would be something if they developed here and only sold here. But, they don't they still sell their wares at reduced rates to such countries. That's their choice! They could easily sell only here. Then there wouldn't be such price discovery concerns.
China has long decided they will not obey or recognize our patents. And we have long decided, that we don't care. If it was such of a concern, 'we' would have made it conditions of barrier to enter the WTO or to have trade with. Same with human rights. Nobody cares.
As for the drugs, we are mainly talking about generics and such. Why not allow a drug from india? Or bring back from Canada?
Why is it that only western nations are accused of protectionism and nativism? Not a word about China, or Japan, or Malaysia, or UAE, or Turkey, or a hundred other countries that insist on maintaining their identities and culture. Just westerners. Doesn't that strike anyone in the elite crowd at slightly odd?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.