I would put the content back in if it was deleted. Feel free to modify this article or add to it, but as far as the content that's already in it, I feel pretty much everything there now is essential. Free market advocates would say that the behavior wasn't anticompetitive but highly competitive. and example of that might be 's an arguable point especially given that a judge said they engaged in anticompetitive behavior. Some would say some completely private situations are coercive monopolies too. A coercive monopoly would include not only government-granted monopoly, but also government monopoly. ![]() It's ok for some things to be "rehashed" on different articles, especially, when it's the wording isn't exactly the same. Is there some reason to keep the information duplicated and balkanized like this? If not, I'd advise that we move about 2/3 of this article to the article on government-granted monopoly, integrate it with the existing text there, and have coercive monopoly stand as a page to (1) define a coercive monopoly generally, (2) link to government-granted monopoly as one of the most important types of coercive monopoly, (3) mention that there are a limited number of non-government-granted coercive monopolies, and possibly (4) talk a bit about the distinction between natural and coercive monopolies in broad outline.ĭoes this sound like a plan? Let me know what y'all think. You could make a case that it's possible for economically interesting coercive monopolies to exist without being government-granted monopolies (e.g., Mafia rackets), but most of the article is not about that. Virtually all forms of coercive monopoly studied by economists are government-granted monopolies, and the majority of the text here is rehashing the discussion of government-granted monopoly elsewhere. ![]() ![]() What is the informative purpose of this article as distinct from government-granted monopoly? Purpose of this article as distinct from government-granted monopoly?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |