To What Extent Should The Government Regulate Monopolies

Many utilities are monopolies by having the entire market share in certain areas. With deregulation of these utilities, the market becomes open to competition for market share to begin. In terms of regulation of monopoly, the government attempts to prevent operations that are against the public interest, call anti-competitive practices. Likewise, oligopoly is a market condition where there are minimal distributors that have a major influence on prices and other market factors. This causes market failure, especially if evidence of collusive behavior by dominant businesses is found.

Finally is the allowance of these monopolies to rise in the first place. Since there were no regulatory agencies back in the second industrial revolution, big businessmen with the idea of trimming fat in their companies could conquer any competitor by using hardball tactics of purposely

In Document 4 “A Call to Action,” by James B. Weaver, it explained to the public through the author's thoughts of that monopolies had too much power and that the monopolies destroy competition and trade. This book was written at the time of when big corporations were taking over and destroying competition. Also, the author goes into detail that they control the price of the raw material, so they can produce their products at a low price and sell it at a low price. By selling that the lowest price, the competitors can not compete are driven out of business or reduce the wages of the workers. This idea can be related to current times were big corporations, such as Walmart, are destroying competition because they lower their prices that the competitors cannot compete with.

Monopolies are quite dangerous economically, and are usually broken up by the federal government, with only two exceptions- electricity, and gas. These are modern examples. A monopoly is the economic term for when a company that makes a product has no competition, and can raise the prices as high as they want. For example, the most obvious and powerful monopoly of the industrial revolution was the railroad monopoly. They made money quite quickly as a shipping company, and destroyed any and all competition as the only transcontinental railroad at the time. It’s leader, Cornelius Vanderbilt came to be considered one of the most powerful people of all time, due to his control over who he shipped for.

Monopolies were never always illegal for example in Document B all the monopolies had all the power. This was a negative impact because the monopolies bullied the smaller businesses and oppressed the lower class. The response to these monopolies was to make monopolies illegal just like it says in Document I. This was a positive response because companies could no longer partner up and team up against smaller companies, which stopped the ability for these big companies to manipulate the people into buying their products. Although the monopolies were getting better the working conditions were

2. Natural monopolies are industries in which it is efficient to have only one producer; in such situations, there is unlikely to be effective competition in the market equilibrium. This lack of competition provides a major reason for government production of private goods. An alternative to public production is government regulation. Whereas the United States has, for the most part, addressed the problem of natural monopolies through regulation, until

Back when the America was divided in thirteen states, the commerce was small and still had many points to improve. As the time passed, these small business started to make commerce between different states, and, consequently, required the government to create laws regulating the commerce, such as the Interstate Commerce Act. With the help of the government, the economy started growing, and so, many monopolies started to appear and so to control business. Years later, these monopolies were much bigger and consequently, the prosperity of country was threatened since there were any competition, nor any incentive to provide best products opportunities. Therefore, the U.S. government was now required to create new laws regulating and intervening in the economy, even though going against the capitalist ideal.

Antitrust laws are meant to protect competition in markets. They try to ensure that all individuals have an “equally opportunity in honest competition.” Early in the nation’s history, there was widespread fear of the dangers of monopolies and other restrictions on competition. In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act to prevent limits on competition caused by private parties. Thus the main goal of antitrust law is to preserve “economic freedom” and a “free-enterprise system.” Specifically, it attempts to preserve “the freedom to compete” for businesses. In a practical sense, antitrust laws are seeking to prevent burdens on competition in the marketplace.

Adam Smith’s and his system have one substantial enemy threat, monopolies. Throughout his life, Adam Smith has warned us about monopolies forming and destroying competition and taking control over government and society. Adam Smith preached for the absolute need for government regulations when it comes to capitalism. Monopolies consist of businessmen who control a specific product in the market with no competition or substitutions. Monopolies favor the business people’s interests, not the society’s interests which hurts capitalism substantially. Businessmen have goals to make themselves more money, not for the public good. In order to do that, they work hand in hand with government officials and politicians to propose and enact laws that

A monopoly is advantageous to the society and is encourages by the government if there are high fixed costs and very strong economies of scale. At the same time, it could also lead to unequal distribution of wealth; containment of consumer choice; lobbying and unethical spending.

The role of antitrust laws has been the subject of numerous publications that have attempted to provide a precise set of reasons and inspirations for their creation. However, there are still many schools of thought on the subject and much debate over the effectiveness and legitimate implementation of these laws. This paper analyzes the three main antitrust laws that the federal branch of the United States government uses to try to restrict monopolies. This paper also looks at antitrust laws in the modern business environment, and attempts to relay the information in a manner that a newcomer to the subject will understand the concept as it relates to modern technology and business practices. The findings of this paper indicate that the topic of antitrust laws is more complex than many believe and, depending on the position of the person affected by monopolies, the sentiment ranges widely.

"Every monopoly and all exclusive privileges are granted at the expense of the public, which ought to receive a fair equivalent… If our Government must sell monopolies, it would seem to be its duty to take nothing less than their full value, and if gratuities must be made once in fifteen or twenty years let them not

The government can without much of a stretch right the harm done by coercive monopolies by basically uprooting government favors and boundaries

The concept of a monopoly is largely misunderstood and the mere mention of the term evokes lots of emotions that make clear judgment almost impossible. The standard economic and social case for or against monopolistic businesses is no longer straightforward.

monopolistic powers, and in their effort to create a system most suitable to their wants and