So lack of government intervention prevented Andrew Carnegie, Jay Gould, J. P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Cornelius Vanderbilt from becoming robber barons? Sorry man, but the past is the best predictor of the future, and the past shows that the free market is not a phenomenon based in reality.
There never was
a free market of the sort that Long, Carson, etc., advocate. I believe I pointed this out above - if not, I apologize for whatever confusion that omission has caused.
I say: "A free market didn't exist, so it's absolutely fucktarded to blame 'the free market' on things like this, or it's absolutely fucktarded to say that 'a free market couldn't handle things like this'.
" To these arguments, you can't say "A free market didn't exist."
I know this. It's critical to the arguments I made. It is not actually an objection to any of the arguments I've raised or cited above - all of which are kind of predicated upon that very same point of fact. You can't use the fact that governments and corporations have historically suppressed a free market, as evidence that a free market (or something more resembling one) is not a realistic possibility.
That said, the history of federal anti-trust law in the US is at best
a mixed bag. For example, in the landmark Standard Oil case, the economic facts were not even considered by the court.
These facts change the story, significantly. Dominick Armentano has literally written a book on anti-trust & monopoly, citing many of the "landmark" cases in the 20th century - he gives a neat little summary here
The little-known truth is that when the government took Standard Oil to court in 1907, Standard Oil's market share had been declining for a decade ... [from approximately 90% to only 64%] at the time of trial. Moreover, there were at least 147 other domestic oil-refining competitors in the market — and some of these were large, vertically integrated firms such as Texaco, Gulf Oil, and Sun. Kerosene outputs had expanded enormously (contrary to usual monopolistic conduct); and prices for kerosene had fallen from more than $2 per gallon in the early 1860s to approximately six cents per gallon at the time of the trial. So much for the myth of the Standard Oil "monopoly".
Competition was rampant, market share was falling, and the firm enjoyed no apparent price-setting power. The three characteristics of monopoly are all strangely absent.
If you read the book (Anti-trust & Monopoly: Anatomy of a Policy Failure), it's the same pattern with Alcoa, Sherman, etc., all through the 20th century. Kind of eye-opening, actually.
I'm not saying that the government doesn't prop up corporate monopolies, because it does. But just that the protections that government regulations provide are completely necessary.
From the last comment I conclude that although you asked for some 'proof', you didn't actually read any of the arguments to which I linked, and that you might not have even read the blockquotes I included in my last post here.
Thanks for playing.