Please. Even in the classic case of Standard Oil, they lost massive amounts of market share even before the government started interfering in their business.
According to Wikipedia:
In 1904, Standard controlled 91 percent of production and
85 percent of final sales. [...] Due to competition from
other firms, their market share had gradually eroded to 70
percent by 1906 which was the year when the antitrust case
was filed against Standard, and down to 64 percent by 1911
when Standard was ordered broken up and at least 147 refining
companies were competing with Standard including Gulf, Texaco,
and Shell. It did not try to monopolize the exploration and
pumping of oil (its share in 1911 was 11 percent).
So when the "white knight" trust busters of government finally got their way, Standard was down to 64% market share. Hardly a monopoly at that point.
> What about businesses that poison the environment in secret?
If we had property in the air and water, then if business harms your property, you have recourse against them. As it stands, the air and water are unowned, which means that they are a permanent tragedy of the commons.
As to your ideas about perfect market competition, etc: real markets are dynamic and vibrant, with new technology disrupting old ways of doing business and new consumer preferences forcing business to adjust. That's fine if some theoretical market theory says in equilibrium, profits tend toward zero, but we live in the real world, so that will never be the case with free markets.
So, the free market where it fits your narrative of the evils of intervention and real markets where your free market narrative breaks down. If you follow your last real market argument a little further, you'll find my positions.
Please. Even in the classic case of Standard Oil, they lost massive amounts of market share even before the government started interfering in their business.
According to Wikipedia:
So when the "white knight" trust busters of government finally got their way, Standard was down to 64% market share. Hardly a monopoly at that point.> What about businesses that poison the environment in secret?
If we had property in the air and water, then if business harms your property, you have recourse against them. As it stands, the air and water are unowned, which means that they are a permanent tragedy of the commons.
As to your ideas about perfect market competition, etc: real markets are dynamic and vibrant, with new technology disrupting old ways of doing business and new consumer preferences forcing business to adjust. That's fine if some theoretical market theory says in equilibrium, profits tend toward zero, but we live in the real world, so that will never be the case with free markets.