Economics: What a monopoly isn't.

[jediuser598]

They are both just social institutions working for the betterment of their relative constituents or share holders. Prosperity is the goal for both. Businesses are working (and helmed) by people attempting to be more prosperous. Governments are working (and helmed) by people attempting to be more prosperous.

So should the road to prosperity for a business and its shareholders care about governments or their constituents? If at odds, whose prosperity should matter more? Even if a business has no interest in allowing other businesses to operate in peace, consumers to buy without fear, or prosperity to build among populaces other than their own, why does that matter?

Businesses and governments are both run by people. Businesses, governments, and people all prosper from a government with a monopoly on force protecting the geographic borders they inhabit. If the government protecting the borders is neither tyrannical to people or businesses, why would businesses or people revolt? How do they gain anything from that?

More market share equals more profit. (generally)

If business can use regulatory capture to prohibit other businesses from becoming their competition, then why not do it? That's a little revolt in and of itself, is it not? Using the government against your competition? (present or potential)

Then the government does something like mandate we buy something, from private industries, like the insurance industry (both automotive and medical).

What happens when businesses centrally plan our government?

[DBTrek]

Well, you’re right that companies collude with government to form monopolies and/or hurt their competitors. What happens as a result? Economic inefficiency is introduced into our system.
What’s the result of that? Inefficient allocation of resources leading to lower quality of life.

[jediuser598]

Well, you’re right that companies collude with government to form monopolies and/or hurt their competitors. What happens as a result? Economic inefficiency is introduced into our system.
What’s the result of that? Inefficient allocation of resources leading to lower quality of life.

Agreed.

[jediuser598]

Think of a regulation you don't like, just name one. Now I ask, why's that there? Why is that barrier of entry there? Was it at the behest of the people, or was it at the behest of business lobbying the government?

[Speaker to Animals]

Think of a regulation you don't like, just name one. Now I ask, why's that there? Why is that barrier of entry there? Was it at the behest of the people, or was it at the behest of business lobbying the government?

"gun-free zones"

It's there because we allow retards to vote.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Think of a regulation you don't like, just name one. Now I ask, why's that there? Why is that barrier of entry there? Was it at the behest of the people, or was it at the behest of business lobbying the government?

"gun-free zones"

It's there because we allow retards to vote.

There was never an option to vote on 'gun-free zones'. It's a result of concerned parents, and school boards catering to them.

Put a couple of weeping mothers in front of congress, and there was never an option. Same as how drunk driving became a capital offense, and now speeding or running a light can cost you a paycheck.

[Speaker to Animals]

Think of a regulation you don't like, just name one. Now I ask, why's that there? Why is that barrier of entry there? Was it at the behest of the people, or was it at the behest of business lobbying the government?

"gun-free zones"

It's there because we allow retards to vote.

There was never an option to vote on 'gun-free zones'. It's a result of concerned parents, and school boards catering to them.

Put a couple of weeping mothers in front of congress, and there was never an option. Same as how drunk driving became a capital offense, and now speeding or running a light can cost you a paycheck.

Oh really? I guess they didn't have a choice about voting for democrats. Strange.

[DBTrek]

Monopolies are a drag on the economy whether people vote for them, businesses push for them, legislators initiate them unprovoked. They make for good capitalism if you’re the monopolist (as Peter Thiel would tell you), but poor economics.

[jediuser598]

Monopolies are a drag on the economy whether people vote for them, businesses push for them, legislators initiate them unprovoked. They make for good capitalism if you’re the monopolist (as Peter Thiel would tell you), but poor economics.

Legislators initiate them unprovoked? They don't appear from nothing. I'm just asking you to take a regulation you don't like, or that you consider restrictive, and then delve into it, why is it there? Who lobbied for it?

Poor economics how? Regulatory capture is good for profits. Greater market share is good for profits. Might not be good for the rest of us, but it's good for the businesses that are on top.

[SuburbanFarmer]

"gun-free zones"

It's there because we allow retards to vote.

There was never an option to vote on 'gun-free zones'. It's a result of concerned parents, and school boards catering to them.

Put a couple of weeping mothers in front of congress, and there was never an option. Same as how drunk driving became a capital offense, and now speeding or running a light can cost you a paycheck.

Oh really? I guess they didn't have a choice about voting for democrats. Strange.

So, every vote for a Democratic candidate is a vote for total SJW-supremacy? And only the god-fearing GOP can save us?

How did Clubby get to you?