counter create hit Antitrust: The Case for Repeal - Download Free eBook
Hot Best Seller

Antitrust: The Case for Repeal

Availability: Ready to download

This tour de force rips the intellectual cover off antitrust regulation to reveal it as a bludgeon used by businesses against their competitors. Unlike many critics, Professor Armentano carries the logic of his analysis to the fullest possible extent: "My position on antitrust has never been ambiguous," he writes. "All of the antitrust laws and all of the enforcement agenc This tour de force rips the intellectual cover off antitrust regulation to reveal it as a bludgeon used by businesses against their competitors. Unlike many critics, Professor Armentano carries the logic of his analysis to the fullest possible extent: "My position on antitrust has never been ambiguous," he writes. "All of the antitrust laws and all of the enforcement agency authority should be summarily repealed. The antitrust apparatus cannot be reformed; it must be abolished." Professor Armentano begins with the most rigorous and revealing account of the Microsoft antitrust battle to appear in print. He further discusses other recent cases, including Toys 'R' Us, Staples, and Intel, as well as many historical cases. He covers nearly every conceivable rationale for antitrust, including price fixing, predatory pricing, product tie-ins, vertical and horizontal mergers, and many more. This is a crucially important work in our new era of antitrust enforcement. This 2nd edition is completely revised and includes a treatment of Murray Rothbard's contributions to the theory of monopoly and competition. It ends by arguing that antitrust is contrary to both free-market economic theory and the protection of property rights in a free society.


Compare

This tour de force rips the intellectual cover off antitrust regulation to reveal it as a bludgeon used by businesses against their competitors. Unlike many critics, Professor Armentano carries the logic of his analysis to the fullest possible extent: "My position on antitrust has never been ambiguous," he writes. "All of the antitrust laws and all of the enforcement agenc This tour de force rips the intellectual cover off antitrust regulation to reveal it as a bludgeon used by businesses against their competitors. Unlike many critics, Professor Armentano carries the logic of his analysis to the fullest possible extent: "My position on antitrust has never been ambiguous," he writes. "All of the antitrust laws and all of the enforcement agency authority should be summarily repealed. The antitrust apparatus cannot be reformed; it must be abolished." Professor Armentano begins with the most rigorous and revealing account of the Microsoft antitrust battle to appear in print. He further discusses other recent cases, including Toys 'R' Us, Staples, and Intel, as well as many historical cases. He covers nearly every conceivable rationale for antitrust, including price fixing, predatory pricing, product tie-ins, vertical and horizontal mergers, and many more. This is a crucially important work in our new era of antitrust enforcement. This 2nd edition is completely revised and includes a treatment of Murray Rothbard's contributions to the theory of monopoly and competition. It ends by arguing that antitrust is contrary to both free-market economic theory and the protection of property rights in a free society.

30 review for Antitrust: The Case for Repeal

  1. 5 out of 5

    Pedro Jorge

    This is not a groundbreaking treatise. However, it does not pretend to be so. With that in mind, in my opinion, it has everything to be considered 5/5 stars, given the goal i believe the author was trying to accomplish: to present the case against antitrust legislation, while introducing the reader to the subject. It is short and provocative, it is direct yet full of content, it is extremely well-referenced in case you want to explore deeper into the topic, and it combines theoretical discussion w This is not a groundbreaking treatise. However, it does not pretend to be so. With that in mind, in my opinion, it has everything to be considered 5/5 stars, given the goal i believe the author was trying to accomplish: to present the case against antitrust legislation, while introducing the reader to the subject. It is short and provocative, it is direct yet full of content, it is extremely well-referenced in case you want to explore deeper into the topic, and it combines theoretical discussion with a variety of historical cases. And it certainly does not avoid subtle topics. Economics as it should be performed. Ludwig von Mises would certainly be proud of this follower of his methods. From now on, this will be at the top of my recommendations for newcomers into the "Austrian" school, although this could certainly be enjoyed by any other critical-minded economist. pdf available for free at: https://mises.org/library/antitrust-c...

  2. 4 out of 5

    Joshua

    This book is a provocative and persuasive treatise on antitrust law and its tremulous empirical/theoretical bases. As one of the loudest voices against the arbitrary and inefficient antitrust system, Armentano expertly dismantles each mainstream argument for antitrust enforcement.

  3. 5 out of 5

    ziombel

    It's a short work of Austrian economist about antitrust policy. The author criticizes the fight against all forms of monopolies. Dominick describes the needed conditions to form a monopoly or cartel in the free market. Even if the free market would create a monopoly or cartel (which is very unlikely), it is required to be more effective than potential competitors to maintain such monopoly. Each cartel which will be created and will not effectively satisfy the needs of consumers quickly fall, bec It's a short work of Austrian economist about antitrust policy. The author criticizes the fight against all forms of monopolies. Dominick describes the needed conditions to form a monopoly or cartel in the free market. Even if the free market would create a monopoly or cartel (which is very unlikely), it is required to be more effective than potential competitors to maintain such monopoly. Each cartel which will be created and will not effectively satisfy the needs of consumers quickly fall, because each of the cartel members and new potential competitors could greatly increase its profits by breaking such a cartel. The author discusses other issues, such as taking over the market by mergers, horizontal and vertical agreements, price-fixing, marketing and disposes of the argument concerning the barriers to entry on the free market. For each of the problems the author gives examples of court cases regarding, inter alia, Microsoft, IBM, Standard Oil, etc. A huge problem in theories of supporters of the fight against monopolies is that they are based on classical and erroneous theories about static economy and models of excellent competition. A huge problem is also to assess whether a company is a monopoly or not. Monopolies and cartels can be created only by creating insurmountable entry barriers by the State (producing concessions and many regulations). Antitrust laws contribute to the creation of cartels, because they punish entrepreneurs for efficiency. The fight against "monopolies" in the free market means fighting with innovations. Actually, any reduction of the price by the company (eg. An attempt to break out of the cartel) will be treated as dumping and attempt to monopolize the market. According to the author the vast majority of antitrust cases to companies were dragged by their less efficient competitors. According to me it is a good work expounding the statists arguments in favor of antitrust laws. The only effective method in the fight against monopolies is to reduce the competence of the state, because they create monopolies by creating impassable entry barriers and destroying efficient competitors. I recommend this work to anyone. //polish Jest to krótka praca austriackiego ekonomisty o polityce antymonopolowej. Autor krytykuje wszelkie formy walki państwa z monopolami. Dominick opisuje warunki które musiałyby wystąpić, aby monopol lub kartel mógł powstać na wolnym rynku. Nawet jeśli na wolnym rynku stworzyłby się monopol lub kartel(co jest bardzo mało prawdopodobne), to utrzymanie takiego monopolu wymagało by od monopolisty większej efektywności od jego potencjalnych konkurentów. Każdy kartel który powstanie i nie będzie efektywnie zaspokajał potrzeb konsumentów, szybko upadnie, ponieważ każdy z członków kartelu oraz nowi potencjalni konkurenci mogą zwiększyć swój zysk łamiąc taki właśnie kartel. Autor porusza także inne kwestie, jak przejmowanie rynku przez fuzje, porozumienia poziome i pionowe, zmowy cenowe, marketing oraz rozprawia się z argumentem dotyczącym barier wejścia na wolnym rynku. Do każdego z problemów autor podaje przykładowe sprawy sądowe, dotyczące między innymi Microsoftu, IBM, Standard Oil itp. Olbrzymim problemem w teoriach zwolenników walki z monopolami jest opieranie się na klasycznych i błędnych teoriach o statycznej gospodarce i doskonałych modelach konkurencji. Olbrzymim problemem jest też ocenienie, czy dana firma jest już monopolem czy jeszcze nie. Monopole i kartele mogą powstać tylko dzięki tworzeniu nieprzekraczalnych barier wejścia przez państwo(tworząc koncesje oraz masę regulacji). Ustawy antymonopolowe przyczyniają się do tworzenia karteli, ponieważ kara się przedsiębiorców za efektywność. Walka z "monopolami" na wolnym rynku oznacza walkę z innowacjami. Tak właściwie każde obniżenie ceny przez firmę(np. próba wyrwania się z kartelu) zostanie potraktowana jako dumping i próbę zmonopolizowania rynku. Według danych autora zdecydowana większość spraw antymonopolowych była wytaczana firmom przez ich mniej wydajnych konkurentów. Według mnie jest to dobra praca rozprawiająca się z etatystycznymi argumentami za ustawami antymonopolowymi. Jedyną skuteczną metodą w walce z monopolami jest ograniczanie kompetencji państwa, ponieważ to ono tworzy monopole tworząc nieprzekraczalne bariery wejścia oraz niszcząc wydajnych konkurentów. Polecam to dzieło każdemu.

  4. 5 out of 5

    Igor

    Thought that monopoly busting was a legitimate use of government until I learned the history of it. Now, any corporation vaguely targeted as a monopoly has no options; raise prices, and its gouging, keep prices the same, and its collusion, lower prices, and its predatory. While in theory, monopolies are detrimental to a healthy market system, which is characterized by consumer choice and competition, in practice, I think there is scant evidence of true monopoly abuses throughout our history, but Thought that monopoly busting was a legitimate use of government until I learned the history of it. Now, any corporation vaguely targeted as a monopoly has no options; raise prices, and its gouging, keep prices the same, and its collusion, lower prices, and its predatory. While in theory, monopolies are detrimental to a healthy market system, which is characterized by consumer choice and competition, in practice, I think there is scant evidence of true monopoly abuses throughout our history, but it is replete with government interventions under the guise of antitrust.

  5. 5 out of 5

    Bill Peacock

    One of the few must-read books if you really want to understand economics. One thing you'll learn is that the only harmful monopoly is one legally-created and enforced by the government, e.g., The East India Company, the Stamp Act, etc. Otherwise, real monopolies are pretty much non-existent, and even if they do happen to come into existence, they only do so through the voluntary actions of consumers in market place who wanted the product--which obviously met the consumers' wants better than any One of the few must-read books if you really want to understand economics. One thing you'll learn is that the only harmful monopoly is one legally-created and enforced by the government, e.g., The East India Company, the Stamp Act, etc. Otherwise, real monopolies are pretty much non-existent, and even if they do happen to come into existence, they only do so through the voluntary actions of consumers in market place who wanted the product--which obviously met the consumers' wants better than any other product on the market. So everyone is better off.

  6. 5 out of 5

    Chris

    Not terribly convincing.

  7. 4 out of 5

    Bobby

    Good discussion - a little shallow on the explanation sometimes, especially for someone who might be less familiar with the behavior of consumers and the economy.

  8. 5 out of 5

    Arthur Rodrigues

  9. 5 out of 5

    Pat

  10. 4 out of 5

    Dominik

  11. 5 out of 5

    Jorgen

  12. 5 out of 5

    Bobby Trucksess

  13. 5 out of 5

    Martin

  14. 5 out of 5

    Jan

  15. 4 out of 5

    Andrew Esselbach

  16. 5 out of 5

    Michael

  17. 5 out of 5

    Jakub Švejda

  18. 4 out of 5

    MARK DA CUNHA

  19. 5 out of 5

    Ike

  20. 4 out of 5

    Spawk Hw

  21. 5 out of 5

    Creighton

  22. 5 out of 5

    Tim Ludden

  23. 4 out of 5

    Geir

  24. 4 out of 5

    Will Shanahan

  25. 4 out of 5

    Brad

  26. 5 out of 5

    Diego Quijano

  27. 5 out of 5

    Oolalaa

  28. 5 out of 5

    Samuel Potter

  29. 5 out of 5

    Zbynek Uher

  30. 4 out of 5

    Bardhyl Salihu

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.