Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecstatic Magnet
A Keynesian study that's pro-Keynesian on a Keynesian website? *gasp*
|
You have it backwards. DiLorenzo is a Libertarian and writes for the Mises Institute. They are Austrian School Economists. That's totally different and usually diametrically opposed to Keynesians.
Quote:
Have you ever heard of anti-trust laws? Monopolies are bad for consumers, workers, and capitalism as a whole, they exist in lieu of effective federal regulation, not because of them.
|
I didn't say Monopolies are good. I said they are either created by or sustained by government.
This is from my link;
The theory of natural monopoly is an economic fiction. No such thing
as a "natural" monopoly has ever existed. The history of the so-called
public utility concept is that the late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth-
century "utilities" competed vigorously and, like all other industries, they
did not like competition.
They first secured government-sanctioned mo-
nopolies, and then, with the help of a few influential economists, con-
structed an ex post rationalization for their monopoly power.
This has to be one of the greatest corporate public relations coups
of all time. "By a soothing process of rationalization," wrote Horace M.
Gray more than 50 years ago, "men are able to oppose monopolies in
general but to approve certain types of monopolies. . . Since these mo-
nopolies were 'natural' and since nature is beneficent, it followed that
they were 'good' monopolies. . .Government was therefore justified in
establishing 'good' monopolies."