Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 17th Feb 2006 12:41 UTC, submitted by jayson.knight
Permalink for comment 97148
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-08-22
>There is a vast difference between "monopoly" and "monopolistic power". The prior means single seller (by comparison, monopsony means single buyer). The latter means it is seen to have market powers akin to a monopoly - and it is defined by competition law.
I don't really agree with you here. "Monopoly" is a theoretical idea. In reality, true monopolies cannot really exist, any more than a perfect circle can exist. "Monopolistic power" is the closest you can get to it in real life, and that's what free societies, in theory, hope to avoid. When people refer to "monopolies," they are ALWAYS referring to companies with "monopolistic power."