Congressional inquiry of Oil industry profits

1. libertarians would argue that in today's economy only the government has the power to make a real monopoly. more than anything, libertarians favor the market being allowed to operate without government manipulation. that means the governmetn does not break up monopolies or collusion. the free market will check these things. libertarianism does not favor breaking up perceived monopolies, unless those monopolies were created by the government.

from the official libertarian website:

"Monopolies
Government is the source of monopoly, through its grants of legal privilege to special interests in the economy. We advocate a strict separation of business and State."

nd furthermore:

"The unrestricted competition of the free market is the best way to foster prosperity"

they mean unrestricted by the government, if you didnt catch that.

http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml

i didnt mean to. i tried to say the opposite. i like monopolies. bring em on. everything is always fine with me as long as the government has no part in it. in fact i will go so far as to say that i encourage the oil companies to try and collude and fix prices.

when i talked with nolimit earlier, i tried to say that i do not favor any checks whatsoever on monopolistic practices. i dont need any protection from the government in this area.

see, i didnt agree with nolimit, i explicity said:

and you have also stated that you do not favor any government intervention, but i know you might not mean that and intend to take no stance.

 

'Legal privilege to special interests in the economy' - pretty key idea, right there. The government is willing to bend the tenets of the free-market/competition to better serve the large corporations that currently control congress. Business and state should most definitely be kept seperate. Catering to big business is one of the legislatures biggest downfalls.

Operative term here is 'competition.' How can there be competition when monopolies exist? It cannot, no two ways about it. My main objective is the preservation of true competition. That is why we have anti-trust legislation, to begin with. That's why I deteste most government programs or agencies (*gasp*). They have absolutely no competition and, thus, produce a lackluster service that only wastes more money than it actually takes to keep them around anyway.

Even if Libertarians do favor the idea of monopolies, that does not mean that I agree with it. There is a lot more to the party, but you are willing to latch onto that one idea to fufill your own fantasy. Like I said, whatever. Let me know if you care to argue the actual substance of the things I've said in relation to the topic at hand, rather than just about me.

Backtrack all you want, but here is what he said, then what you followed it up with in your next post:

I'm not trying to drag NLMD into this, only point out that you frequently get off on pointing out things about me while simultaneously ignoring similar actions of others. Thats fine, though. I can understand being deeply fascinated with someone like myself. You're not the only one.

 

I don't think it is the government's job to tell anyone how much they must charge for their products. The reasons why one would sell a product below cost is their business, not the gov't. Who knows, maybe an owner wants to attract more customers so he can sell his other over-priced products, thus making more money in the long run ... or maybe he's a stupid owner ... or maybe he's trying to put his competitor out of business.

I wonder how long it'll be before the government steps in and tells Wal-Mart to raise their prices b/c they are putting their competitors out of business.

 

i think all he is saying is that you claim to be a libertarian when you are opposed to the basic premise which libertarians stand for.

 

and if you try to limit monopolies with government intervention, you are worsening the problem of the govenment manipulating business.

sepArate. i agree. then why favor the government breaking up monopolies? do you mean you think business and state should not be separate? dont you think anti-trust legislation is the government meddling with the market?

of course there can, as long as the government is not involved. only the government can coerce us and make us do something by force. you dont like a large corporation? dont buy their products as much. if oil companies collude, that will be great for alternative energies. but not if the government intervenes and ruins it. that is the sort of interference that slows progress.

then you should oppose the government breaking up companies they believe to be monopolies. the free market consists of buyers and sellers. if the sellers try to sell you things that costs too much, nobody say you have to buy them. how is crippling one industry "true competition"?

libertarians dont really believe monopolies exist unless they are caused by the government.

ok, i disagree with nolimit on his specific point about trust-busting. when i said i agree with everything he says, that was a mistake.

 

I know what he's trying to say, he's just wrong because he assumes that translates into every other particle of the philosophy, while clearly ignoring my objective to preserve the free-market.

 

that is correct. but i understand now. he is not into everything that party stands for. it was my mistake.

 

preserving the free market by government regulation is a self-contradiction. (not that you favor regulation. i do not know what you favor.)

 

also i know why i misunderstood what nolimt was saying when he said:

"However, I do have a concern if there is any sort of collusion or anti-trust activity going on"

i also have a concern if there is "anti-trust" activity going on. i think he made a mistake and meant the opposite. he doesnt like trusts. i do. obviously anti-trust activity is government activity.

 

It's not manipulation. It's preventention in the interest of preserving the free-market. How you can believe in the greatness of the free-market and simultaneously favor monopolies is beyond me.

No, I think price-fixing and eliminating competition is meddling with the market.

That's pretty short-sighted to assume that if the price of gas skyrocketed to $10/gal overnight that the immediate impact to our economy would not cripple it to the point where it could not support the development of new technologies. The economy must be healthy to support new inventions, particularly on a large scale.

But in a monopoly, the market consists of buyers and seller. No competition equals bad product. Period.

You're right, everyone should just quit buying gas and dream up alternate means of transport overnight. That should fix everything.

Crippling? So now the oil companies are in danger of being crippled? Preposterous.

Further, as has been explained to you by others that you're not so eager to disagree with in this thread, unreasonable surges in gas prices threaten to cripple most of the other industries that you and I rely on day-in and day-out.