Quote:
Originally Posted by Thematic-Device
Oh I'm sorry I seemed to remember New York City having a massive infrastructure to bring clean water into the city. The simply fact is, if water was privatized in New York City the cities economy could be ruined in months if a water company wished to make a quick buck.
|
And what would happen if a water company raised prices too high? Competitors would enter the market, and charge a lower price than the monopoly. When has there ever been a natrual monopoly that is not supported by the state?
Quote:
|
No its not. When MC=MR the market won't have a surplus, but under a monopoly it will not be selling where S=D. Its rather simple economics, if the Austrian School were good enough at marginality they'd understand this.
|
Let me think about this, I might be wrong. By the way, I don't know what the Austrian perspective on this is.
Quote:
|
We are talking inefficiencies. Inefficiencies should be avoided whenever possible because it means people are getting less for more. Competitive Markets create efficient outcomes, monopolies do not, which is why governments break up monopolies, and when they cannot break them up, force them to submit to regulation.
|
Again, when has a natural monopoly existed with out the help of the state?
Quote:
|
Laissez-faire is as tired and dead as Marxism. In fact whenever it was implemented people rebelled against it, and curtailed its oversteps and abuses.
|
When?
Quote:
|
Surely, if it worked nations which implemented would be far more economically advanced then the moderate systems of the OECD. Oh I know you're going to use the old marxist cop-out that its never been really tried.
|
What nations? Russia has implemented free market ideas, and while Russia currently sucks, it is growing faster than the U.S.