Quote from: Alpaca John on May 31, 2013, 11:32:22 PM

In a free market, I think monopoly's in general will almost certainly develop over things that are scarce.

I agree that monopolies are not good, and I agree that when you have one you can institute price controls and understand that is the source of your concern.

I would like to challenge your assumption that the free market is the cause of monopoly. I would like you to consider the definition of monopoly, in relation to the state, any state not just the US, Germany or otherwise.

Quote from: myrkul on May 31, 2013, 10:10:07 PM

I think the definition provided (A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity)

By lobbying government and affecting the law, you can create a monopoly, Fiat, being the most obvious and bank's who own the institution that controls it being somewhat central to this discussion. But other monopolies exist that are granted by the state; Intellectual Property by its definition takes an ethereal idea and through law creates a physical monopoly. Many believe this monopoly is necessary and is the sole drive behind innovation (just a meme not fact).

Another monopoly is Land. The state by granting property rights of land to one farmer, is denying another labour the right to farm the land (state sanctioned unemployment). Almost everyone argues this monopoly is the sole driving force behind the fee market (just a meme not fact).

I would also like to challenge you objection to the use of violence, it is and should always be a measure of last resort, it shouldn't be illegal, just avoided at almost any cost. When you attempt to eradicate Direct Violence through Law it materialises as Structural Violence in society. Almost everyone believes violence is wrong, but we give power to a state to uses force (resulting in violence) to prevent violence. (just a meme not fact) yet People overlook the irony, as they believe it is a means to an end.

Quote from: Mahatma Gandhi

Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary.

Quote from: Richy_T on June 02, 2013, 12:38:03 AM

~~Sensible~~ Selfish people try to avoid them.

as Richy_T couldn't put it more bluntly, I would add you don't need to be sensible to want to avoid it. All lesser competing mammals, reptiles, and insects know the limit when mounting a challenge of finite recourses, be it a mate, or territory in the wild. They know how far to push and when to stop before you need to prevent a compromising injury (a war).

To the point of Drug violence, and the profitable street corner, innovation has created a better system, a virtual street corner (Silk Road) where everyone competes on equal footing, the result is the consumer gets better service and more competitive pricing. The trend is free market solves problems most effectively.

Quote from: Alpaca John on June 02, 2013, 11:50:49 AM

Some farmers will realize that cooperating with their neighbors gives them an advantage over all other farmers.

Quote from: Alpaca John on June 02, 2013, 11:50:49 AM

Bottomline: when scarcity is an issue, an unregulated free market will inevitably lead to a lack of competition, and thus price fixing.

Corporation and healthy competition is what happens in a free market.

I question you resulting prediction. While I agree business may have the objective to achieve a monopoly, and reduce the farmers to slaves, the free market does not give them a mechanism to achieve that goal, as illustrated with the Silk Road example or consumers changing their eating habits Corn - Wheat.

I share your concern though. As prises are sticky, corporations who have influence with the central banks can manipulate the money supply and force a boom bust business cycle, and the corporations can snap up the valuable properly during the peak insolvencies, as has been happening since the early 1900.

Quote from: Alpaca John on June 02, 2013, 11:50:49 AM

Bottomline: when scarcity is an issue, an unregulated free market will inevitably lead to a lack of competition, and thus price fixing.

Quote from: myrkul on June 02, 2013, 03:18:58 PM

The market doesn't need ~~your~~ regulations. It's self-regulating.

I would say "scarcity" is a function of demand, not supply the value is created by what the demand side is willing to do to obtain what is scarce. If the Demand is grossly asymmetric and incurable then you need to address how the monopoly is allowed to exist.

I agree with everything myrkul has to say as to why monopolies are not practical to maintain, and would disappear when one eradicate government . where I agree with Alpaca John is, if you can get a monopoly, you can affect controlee and price manipulation, and where I disagree with Alpaca John is I don't believe it is possible to ever regulate or prevent monopolies through State control, ultimately someone convinces someone that a monopoly would be good for the people, and when it becomes law the working class suffer.

As I see it:
Alpaca John: is using the scientific method to prove that a monopoly is likely attainable through the use of capital, (proposed a solution - regulation is needed).
Myrkul: is proving a monopoly is highly unlikely due to Human Preference, ( solution - markets self regulate)

Adrian-X: both are correct - Alpaca John solution is wrong; Myrkul: solution is correct but insufficient. (Solution the property, given by God or the gods, or the big bang, [land air and water] is redefined in a new meme as something other than a commodity)