Economists and Antitrust
Why neoclassical economists are wrong to stop short of calling for the full repeal of antitrust.
Why neoclassical economists are wrong to stop short of calling for the full repeal of antitrust.
The essential element in monopoly is forcible exclusion and forcible reservation, not the number of producers.
Fair disclosure: how much did Netscape pay Robert Bork to become an apologist for the most destructive government action of our time?
Judge Jackson's reasoning is fatally flawed, says Dominick T. Armentano. Microsoft has a dominant position in a narrowly defined relevant market, but no meaningful monopoly and no output restricting monopoly power.
Judge Jackson's decision in the Microsoft case assumes that superior technology doesn't win out in market competition. Is he right?
Like most readers of The Mises Review, Professor Tushnet is fed up with the Supreme Court. I doubt, though, that his complaint against the Court will have much resonance with most of my readers.
Frank Michelman is famous among law professors for his acute critical intellect, and his powers of demolition are much in evidence in Brennan and Democracy.
The shoe industry is under regulatory attack, adding to the list of businesses punished for exercising the freedom to make contracts and compete in a market economy.
Greenspan recently said he is not sure what the money supply is. But money is like any commodity: it has a supply and it can be counted.
The judge in the Microsoft case says the company is like Standard Oil earlier this century. He's right, for the wrong reasons.