What do you mean? Minimising monopolies is how you keep the free market competitive.
But every sport punishes competitors who are cheating or being unsportsmanlike. As it should be in the marketplace. But hackers and the EU and US bureaucrats think that being a leader in a market has to be punished for being a "monopoly". While always turning a blind eye to rampant fraud and scams that are in the marketplace everywhere online and offline.
Almost all North American sports have a player entry draft, where the weighting is based on your success. The best teams (eg the Detroit Red Wings of the 90’s and 00’s) are given garbage draft picks, while the bottom-feeders (eg the Edmonton Oilers of the late 00’s-early 10’s) are given (the opportunity for) superstars. This is clearly a punishment for doing well, and a reward for being terrible.
Did he cheat? No, everyone used a similar amount of steroids. But to anyone with eyes and a basic knowledge of the sport it's overwhelmingly obvious that the organizers and judges threw it in his favor because of the attention it would bring.
Which is the issue when an entity becomes too big to fail. There is a power disparity that is virtually impossible to overcome as the leverage is so much that any opponent can be swat down with ease.
Things such as:
- leveraging economies of scale when dealing with suppliers and resources to the point of starving access to competition
- using lobbyists to write legislation in their favor or blockade opponents
- doing fuck all with no reservations, then pay out lawsuits and fines at an order of magnitude less than profit made and damage done
This is a provocative claim. Do you have any examples?
Constantly winning in a competitive environment with no runaway feedback loops[0] is evidence of cheating.
See also, casinos: the "legitimate" ones don't rig the game - they know the odds; they expect you to win something here and then, but if they see you winning consistently, they'll rightfully assume you're cheating somehow, and ban you from the venue.
> But every sport punishes competitors who are cheating or being unsportsmanlike. As it should be in the marketplace.
Marketplace isn't like sportsball. It's like war. On the market like in war, anything goes. The only people who can afford living under delusion of market sportsmanship are people who are already so well-off and safe they can treat it as a game; for everyone else, it's a matter of life and death.
> But hackers and the EU and US bureaucrats think that being a leader in a market has to be punished for being a "monopoly".
The market isn't some divine ball game, or a magic ritual. It's a feedback system, with known failure modes. Wrt. monopolies, in particular, any good profit-seeking actor will aim at becoming a monopolist in their market segment, because that's how they can maximize profits while minimizing effort. At the same time, the market serves a critical function in organizing human society - but that stops working when monopolies pop up.
It's really very simple: all the goods and services and advancement we enjoy require market players to be actively putting in effort. To society, an entrepreneur is basically a donkey with a pole mounted to it, from which there hangs a carrot, just out of reach - the donkey just wants to grab the carrot, but the society only benefits when the donkey is chasing it. The donkey needs to believe they can win, so it keeps running, but it also can never be allowed to actually get their prize, because then it'll stop. That's why markets are regulated as to let people and companies grow and accumulate winnings, until a point, past which they'd stop participating (or worse, just go screwing around breaking things).
I.e. it's not about punishing someone for winning - it's about preventing them from complete victory, because then they become useless to society.
> While always turning a blind eye to rampant fraud and scams that are in the marketplace everywhere online and offline.
Who's turning a blind eye to it? Fraud and scams are the base state of the market; it's what it decays to if left to its own devices. Regulations are there to counteract this tendency.
--
[0] - Feedback loops like compounding interest. In sports, unlike in the economy, you can't just reinvest your win to get more wins, and then reinvest them in turn, until you're winning so much so fast that no one can ever hope to catch up with you.
Right. How did Usain Bolt cheat? How did Michael Phelps cheat? How did ABBA cheat?
> any good profit-seeking actor will aim at becoming a monopolist in their market segment
Of course. And then hackers redefine the market segment to encompass that businesses product and ta-da, you have a monopoly. Like Apple.
If we're talking about real monopolies, then I couldn't agree more. But what hackers and the EU are doing is redefining monopoly in a dishonest way because they have personal grudges against a company.
> The donkey needs to believe they can win, so it keeps running, but it also can never be allowed to actually get their prize, because then it'll stop.
Here's something to blow your mind: The donkey enjoys running. Or let's take a real life example: sled dogs. They love pulling the sled. Entrepreneurs love working and love competing. Those who don't love it usually pull out of the game with their profits way before they have even national impact.
This is a huge divide in attitude I've seen everywhere in the world in my life. You have category X of people who see all kind of work as an immense suffering. They complain endlessly, do the minimum effort, and never get anywhere. And you have category Y of people who love working, because it's doing something productive and learning. That doesn't mean that they're satisfied with being abused wage slaves. Rather it is the first category who never advances in life, because they think it's all a scam. People in the second category also fail a lot because they take chances. But they usually get up again.
> Who's turning a blind eye to it? Fraud and scams are the base state of the market; it's what it decays to if left to its own devices. Regulations are there to counteract this tendency.
All governments and law enforcement seem to be turning a blind eye to it. About 50% of advertisements on Facebook and Instagram are outright scams, ie physical products from brand names that are advertised at bargain prices and if you "buy" it you will not get delivery because it is an outright scam. US and EU governments should fine Meta billions of dollars for having their main source of income from organized crime and fraud. But they are focused on completely irrelevant crap like app stores. Talk about sieving mosquitoes and swallowing camels.
So your analogy is very terrible, unless Simone Biles was bribing sports officials to change the rules to effectively prevent other gymnasts competing against her.
A better analogy for a monopoly in a free market is allelopathy in plants, where you actively modify the environment to starve out competitors.