by Arlos » Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:11 pm
Yeah, but how much of that is because the government enforces anti-monopoly laws?
Think about how rich MS was in the mid-90s and how badly Apple was doing. If there were no anti-monopoly laws, MS had so much cash available that it could (and would) have simply bought Apple lock stock and barrel in a hostile takeover, and killed them off. Then they would have done the same thing to any other startup competitor that looked like it might get anywhere. They COULDN'T though, because of the federal laws against monopolies.
That's the entire point. We don't HAVE monopolies like they did at the start of the 20th century because they're not allowed now.
But in all seriousness, go look at what some of those business moguls did back then. Just look at Rockefeller and Standard Oil, and how they literally controlled every aspect of the oil business, down to who made the barrels, etc. If you wanted to sell kerosene for lamps back in the 1890s, you had no choice in the US BUT to buy it from Standard Oil. Period. Rockefeller was in no way enabled by the government to do what he did, he just went out and did it. Standard oil only got its monopoly broken when the government stepped in and did something about it. See Carnegie and US Steel for another example.
-Arlos