The Chicago school opposes monopolies and bailouts, but they support the conditions that inevitably lead to monopolies and too-big-to-fail companies.
The Chicago school opposes monopolies and bailouts, but they support the conditions that inevitably lead to monopolies and too-big-to-fail companies.
ryathal@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
The conditions get created by government distortion of a market. Chicago School discourages government intervention.
PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 5 days ago
That lack of intervention is what created the conditions
Capitalism naturally moves towards monopoly. Government regulation prevents monopolies. Capitalism accumulates power. Capitalists use that power to influence the government into letting them accumulate more power, until they have enough power to remove the regulations that prevent monopolies, then the capitalists form monopolies, then we get the very situation that we’re describing.
ryathal@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
Government regulation also creates and sustains monopolies. Most cable companies have competition prohibited by law. Bail outs allow companies that should fail and be replaced by many smaller companies to instead be more monopolistic.
PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 5 days ago
And how do you think laws like these came into existence? Capitalists accumulated power and then used that power to influence the government to protect their business.
You’re so close but for some reason you refuse to accept that business can and does influence the government.
But beyond that, the regulations we’re talking about were anti-monoply regulations. Despite you saying that the Chicago school is anti-monoply, they pushed to defang regulations that combated monopolies. Your justification is that regulations create monopolies, but you provide no reasoning why defanging anti-monoply regulations would reduce monopolies.