[Home]History of Natural monopoly/Talk

HomePage | Recent Changes | Preferences

Revision 3 . . May 17, 2001 6:02 am by LA2
Revision 2 . . May 17, 2001 5:55 am by LA2
Revision 1 . . May 17, 2001 5:52 am by Lee Daniel Crocker
  

Difference (from prior major revision) (author diff)

Changed: 6c6,8
LA2: Either way, you should keep the pointer back to monopoly. Pointers are always useful, whether they point to related or opposite words. (I have no informed oppinion on the economic theory here.)
LA2: Either way, you should keep the pointer back to monopoly. Pointers are always useful, whether they point to related or opposite words. (I have no informed opinion on the economic theory here.)

However, I do have an uninformed opinion: I think it is an open matter of discussion whether any "natural" monopolies exist. It is very hard to do experiments on the national or continental scale, so tradition or ideology has determined what gets to be a monopoly. Radio and TV stations were governmental monopolies in most west European democracies for most of the 20th century. Each city has a municipal monopoly for street lights. Each country has a monopoly currency. Some libertarian economists might think we could handle multiple currencies, regulated by private banks, and there would be no need for a central bank. Maybe this uncertainty should be reflected in the definition.

HomePage | Recent Changes | Preferences
Search: