Thursday , June 27 2019
Home / Cafe Hayek / Antitrust’s Sordid History

Antitrust’s Sordid History

Summary:
In my latest column for AIER, I summarize the rent-seeking-filled history of American antitrust legislation. Here’s my conclusion: George Stigler was incorrect. Far from monopolists being the only parties to oppose antitrust legislation, it was firms seeking monopoly power — producers seeking protection from new competitors — that pushed hard for antitrust statutes. Antitrust, while costumed as a tool to promote competition, was from its start a scheme to promote and protect monopoly power. Comments

Topics:
Don Boudreaux considers the following as important: , , ,

This could be interesting, too:

Don Boudreaux writes Douglas Irwin: Winner of the 2019 Hayek Prize

Don Boudreaux writes Protectionists from Plunderland and from Wonderland

Don Boudreaux writes Some Links

Don Boudreaux writes Quotation of the Day…

In my latest column for AIER, I summarize the rent-seeking-filled history of American antitrust legislation. Here’s my conclusion:

George Stigler was incorrect. Far from monopolists being the only parties to oppose antitrust legislation, it was firms seeking monopoly power — producers seeking protection from new competitors — that pushed hard for antitrust statutes. Antitrust, while costumed as a tool to promote competition, was from its start a scheme to promote and protect monopoly power.

Comments

Don Boudreaux
He is a professor of economics at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. Previously, he was president of the Foundation for Economic Education.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *