The Free Market Regulating Itself

#1
n_huffhines

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
88,351
Likes
53,295
#1
Today marks the 10th Anniversary of the Justice Department dropping its antitrust case against Microsoft's Internet Explorer. Microsoft owned 90% of the Web-browsing market. Today, despite government's failure to break up the "monopoly", Explorer is used by less than half of the Web-browsing public. Who is afraid of monopolies when the free market gives us cool stuff like Firefox and Chrome?

If the regulators had defeated Microsoft rather than the free market, we might be using the latest version of Netscape.
 
#4
#4
nbakerld said:
So they rebranded and did a massive overhaul to win market share rather than having it handed to them? That's what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

If the antitrust case wouldn't have been dropped, do you think they wouldn't have done this anyway?
 
#5
#5
rjd970 said:
If the antitrust case wouldn't have been dropped, do you think they wouldn't have done this anyway?
Click to expand...

The marketplace would be offering better products than they did in 2001, but I doubt the product quality would be what it is today.

Either way, the point is we didn't need regulation to resolve this.
 
#6
#6
imagine how much better off we'd be now if the free market, not government mandate, had been able to determine who was worthy of home ownership and who wasn't
 
#9
#9
I'm still not sure I see this as great victory for the free market. MS still has licensing agreements with most of the hardware manufacturers that keeps windows on most machines -- that was and is the real monopoly to me -- though that's changing with the rise of tablets, etc.

How does mozilla make money by offering its browser for free? Linux appears to be the primary competition for windows, and it's free as well. Is that really a free market? The competition doesn't seem to really be able to price its product or earn money.
 
#10
#10
MG1968 said:
I just wanted to get my .02 cents in before the gsvol/utgibbs Wonder Twins act screwed up the thread
Click to expand...

You have some great call outs, MG, sometimes.

The rubbish about the government "forcing" the banks to make bad loans has been debunked ad infinitum so much so, it is just boring. Only the most disciplined flunkies of the bourgeoisie believe this utter tosh. And if I need to, I will bring the hammer on the notion that minority lending led to the financial crisis.

And yes, if you want to continue with the canard, it's racism.

:hi:
 
#11
#11
I had to do a double-take to make sure I hadn't been hit by a Bray missile when I read the OP, especially the title. As for the market "regulating itself" I give you....

Our own historic time.

Let's look into the personal crisis inflicted upon Chief Architect, Alan Greenspan:

But Mr. Greenspan, who was first appointed by President Ronald Reagan, placed far more blame on the Wall Street companies that bundled subprime mortgages into pools and sold them as mortgage-backed securities. Global demand for the securities was so high, he said, that Wall Street companies pressured lenders to lower their standards andproduce more “paper.”

“The evidence strongly suggests that without the excess demand from securitizers, subprime mortgage originations (undeniably the original source of the crisis) would have been far smaller and defaults accordingly far lower,” he said.
Click to expand...

“Do you feel that your ideology pushed you to make decisions that you wish you had not made?”

“Yes, I’ve found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I’ve been very distressed by that fact.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
#12
#12
jvol1 said:
I'm still not sure I see this as great victory for the free market. MS still has licensing agreements with most of the hardware manufacturers that keeps windows on most machines -- that was and is the real monopoly to me -- though that's changing with the rise of tablets, etc.

How does mozilla make money by offering its browser for free? Linux appears to be the primary competition for windows, and it's free as well. Is that really a free market? The competition doesn't seem to really be able to price its product or earn money.
Click to expand...

There is a LOT of money to be made in open source. For example, IBM puts a couple of flavors of Linux out there for free (and is behind the scenes on several other distros). They then sell service contracts to companies to help them install and maintain their systems. Just one of the ways money is made on open source.
 
#13
#13
utgibbs said:
You have some great call outs, MG, sometimes.

The rubbish about the government "forcing" the banks to make bad loans has been debunked ad infinitum so much so, it is just boring. Only the most disciplined flunkies of the bourgeoisie believe this utter tosh. And if I need to, I will bring the hammer on the notion that minority lending led to the financial crisis.

And yes, if you want to continue with the canard, it's racism.

:hi:
Click to expand...

The Government Did It - Forbes.com

For some reason I seem to feel that the good people at Forbes know more about the economy and the effects of regulation than you do.
 
#14
#14
Fair enough with this example, but OP, just for the record, do you believe that market regulation is always bad?
 
#15
#15
Brewerw said:
Fair enough with this example, but OP, just for the record, do you believe that market regulation is always bad?
Click to expand...

I do.

Simple laws against force, fraud and theft are all that a society needs. The same laws that would apply to me or you in our personal lives would cover any situation in business.

As for anything else, essentially any voluntary transaction between consenting adults should be legal.
 
#16
#16
utgibbs said:
You have some great call outs, MG, sometimes.

The rubbish about the government "forcing" the banks to make bad loans has been debunked ad infinitum so much so, it is just boring. Only the most disciplined flunkies of the bourgeoisie believe this utter tosh. And if I need to, I will bring the hammer on the notion that minority lending led to the financial crisis.

And yes, if you want to continue with the canard, it's racism.

:hi:
Click to expand...

speaking of tosh, here's Daniel Tosh:

Daniel-Tosh-Happy-Thoughts.jpg
 
#17
#17
utgibbs said:
You have some great call outs, MG, sometimes.

The rubbish about the government "forcing" the banks to make bad loans has been debunked ad infinitum so much so, it is just boring. Only the most disciplined flunkies of the bourgeoisie believe this utter tosh. And if I need to, I will bring the hammer on the notion that minority lending led to the financial crisis.

And yes, if you want to continue with the canard, it's racism.

:hi:
Click to expand...

u forgot looking out the back door
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#18
#18
RespectTradition said:
I do.

Simple laws against force, fraud and theft are all that a society needs. The same laws that would apply to me or you in our personal lives would cover any situation in business.

As for anything else, essentially any voluntary transaction between consenting adults should be legal.
Click to expand...
So you have no issue with monopolies?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#20
#20
jvol1 said:
I'm still not sure I see this as great victory for the free market. MS still has licensing agreements with most of the hardware manufacturers that keeps windows on most machines -- that was and is the real monopoly to me -- though that's changing with the rise of tablets, etc.

How does mozilla make money by offering its browser for free? Linux appears to be the primary competition for windows, and it's free as well. Is that really a free market? The competition doesn't seem to really be able to price its product or earn money.
Click to expand...

So you have a problem with bundling? I never really thought selling a hot dog with a free soda was monopolistic. It's not predatory pricing, it's true promotion.
 
#21
#21
Brewerw said:
Fair enough with this example, but OP, just for the record, do you believe that market regulation is always bad?
Click to expand...

Yes and no. No, because there are good laws. Yes, because you can't pass good regulatory policy without passing a whole bunch of really dumb policies. I feel like if you regulate, inevitably you are going to do more harm than good.
 
#22
#22
Brewerw said:
So you have no issue with monopolies?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

No issue with the business end of a monopoly, whatsoever. I take it up with government. Without government regulation on your side, sustaining a monopoly is impossible.

Also, the only real monopolies out there are in government: courier mail, k-12 education, national defense, etc.
 
#23
#23
nbakerld said:
No issue with the business end of a monopoly, whatsoever. I take it up with government. Without government regulation on your side, sustaining a monopoly is impossible.

Also, the only real monopolies out there are in government: courier mail, k-12 education, national defense, etc.
Click to expand...

Not true. Standard Oil?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#24
#24
nbakerld said:
So you have a problem with bundling? I never really thought selling a hot dog with a free soda was monopolistic. It's not predatory pricing, it's true promotion.
Click to expand...

It's not free. You should have a choice, and it should be cheaper to buy a computer without software installed. Microsoft wouldn't be making billions without some licensing revenues; it's just a matter of how much is getting kicked back to the other guys.

Of course, it's not clear how many people would know what to do without windows pre-installed and ready to hold their hands from the get go.

And on a side note, you don't find all the crappy bundled software with its pop-ups and other limitations annoying? It can be difficult to get rid of.
 
#25
#25
Brewerw said:
Not true. Standard Oil?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

In 1904 their market share was ~91% but by 1911 before they were broken up that had dropped to 64% without any government intervention.

Basically, they hit the market first, had the best business model, helped consumers (kerosene was $.88 per gallon in 1870 and $.06 per gallon in 1907), but others were finally catching up.

How was their "monopoly" bad?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top