> But when it comes to monopolies I just don't see them ever going away now. Too much globalization combined with lobbying power and corporate veils.
We’ve been here before though, in the era of Standard Oil. They can be broken up, but it won’t just happen on its own. The government needs to take action.
> We’ve been here before though, in the era of Standard Oil.
If interested, Standard Oil was drawn as an octopus in Puck magazine (1904). The Library of Congress notes: "Illustration shows a "Standard Oil" storage tank as an octopus with many tentacles wrapped around the steel, copper, and shipping industries, as well as a state house, the U.S. Capitol, and one tentacle reaching for the White House." [0]
The government is taking action. The government is in on this consolidation via investments, contracts, preferential legal & tax treatment, etc. Think about this from the government's perspective. The government would rather govern a small number of large entities instead of a large number of small entities, thus the government is incentivized to favor monopolies/oliogopolies. The government itself is a monopoly of power in many domains.
Sure, the government may intervene with a company getting too big, but the intervention is so the government can gain a foothold with that company. e.g. any telecommunications platform will need to have back doors for the law enforcement agencies or said telecommunications platform will not be allowed to operate.
> Think about this from the government's perspective. The government would rather govern a small number of large entities instead of a large number of small entities, thus the government is incentivized to favor monopolies/oliogopolies.
According to what incentives? The government’s responsibility is to the country at large.
It's very beneficial to them for just a few companies to control everything. Then they can deperson you and say "It's a private company, not the government, they have to freedom to do business with whoever they want". That's quite a bit more difficult when there are thousands of equally viable competitors.
This is the conspiracy I personally believe the most. The founding fathers knew that government always wants more power and control. Logically following from that, of course they would use any means necessary to subvert the checks put on their power.
That's hardly even a conspiracy theory. For it to be true doesn't even require any particular government officials to coordinate at all. It just requires a large portion of government officials to correct estimate that this situation in their best interests.
Yeah I feel like George Washington's parting letter[0] on avoiding large political parties because they lead to infighting, popularity-only contests, and foreign manipulation was completely ignored.
> Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight) the common
> & continual mischiefs of the spirit of Party are sufficient to make it the interest and the duty of a wise People to discourage and restrain it.
> It serves always to distract the Public Councils and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with
> ill founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot & insurrection.
> It opens the door to foreign influence & corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions.
We’ve been here before though, in the era of Standard Oil. They can be broken up, but it won’t just happen on its own. The government needs to take action.