The Myth of Capitalism | Jonathan Tepper

Summary of: The Myth of Capitalism: Monopolies and the Death of Competition
By: Jonathan Tepper

Introduction

Discover the critical concepts and overarching message within ‘The Myth of Capitalism: Monopolies and the Death of Competition’ by Jonathan Tepper. This book unearths the growing dominance of monopolies and oligopolies in various industries and their devastating effects on capitalism. Learn about the history of antitrust laws and the role they have played in curbing market dominance. Understand the factors that contribute to market concentration, such as mergers, collusions, and various business practices like horizontal shareholding. Moreover, explore how this lack of competition and market control leads to increased pricing power, economic inequality, and the stagnation of innovation.

Monopolies and Oligopolies

Billionaire investor Warren Buffet prefers investing in monopolies and sectors with limited competition. Buffet’s view is shared by Silicon Valley’s Peter Thiel, who has invested in the monopoly Facebook and believes that capitalism and competition are opposites. Monopolies and oligopolies are prevalent in the US, and they’re known to exert their power and wealth to dominate industries and rig the rules in their favor. Consumers end up paying more for goods and services due to cartels’ tendencies to collude, and these firms don’t need to talk overtly to collaborate on prices; they just need to react to each other’s price moves.

The Price of Monopolies

Mergers, non-compete agreements, and offshoring have contributed to the rise of monopolies leaving workers in vulnerable positions with stagnant wages and decreased productivity.

Mergers have played a significant role in the concentration of market power. Big businesses have eliminated rivals through buying them out during periods of extreme merger activity. However, this has resulted in harmful effects such as price hikes, fewer business start-ups, reduced productivity and wages, increased inequality, and less robust small cities and towns. The combined businesses invest little in research and development for innovation and increased capacity, opting instead to raise profits by cutting production and restricting supply.

Employers who ask workers to sign non-compete agreements prevent them from working for competitors for a defined period of time after leaving their jobs or being fired. This leaves employees with even fewer choices and vulnerability. The rise in profitability mostly comes from rent-seeking and influence peddling.

Additionally, offshoring has rendered many jobs temporary, putting workers in shaky and insecure positions with inconsistent work hours and income, no benefits, and no power to negotiate. Collective bargaining through unions has also declined, leaving workers even more vulnerable. A 2017 study shows that wages decline by 15% to 25% when a competitive, multiemployer labor market shrinks to only a few hiring firms. The decline in wages persists in the US, despite the rise in business profits. The issue of monopolies is widespread, and it’s vital to address the root problems to ensure fair competition, job security, and overall economic growth.

Tech Giants’ Monopoly

The power and influence of Silicon Valley technology companies have reached new heights, with the biggest firms commanding a market value worth trillions of dollars. While this has allowed them to operate with greater efficiency and profit, it has also raised concerns about their monopoly and the need for antitrust regulations. Start-ups have accused Google of using its market share to stifle competition, while Facebook exerts its authority over 80% of social traffic. Amazon’s monopoly extends to a whopping 75% of book sales and 43% of the e-commerce market. However, these companies have largely evaded regulatory action, a fact that has been attributed to their significant market share and the strength of their economies of scale. The problem is not limited to the tech sector alone, as several other industries witness similar monopolistic behavior by a few dominant companies. Critics have argued that such monopolies lead to increased inequality, as consumers end up paying a regressive tax that benefits only the top players.

The Antitrust Paradox

The Antitrust Paradox revolves around the journey of antitrust laws globally and their effectiveness in curbing monopolies. In the late 1800s, famous “robber barons” Cornelius Vanderbilt and John D. Rockefeller had monopolized certain sectors by eliminating competitors through underpricing. This led to the US Congress passing the Sherman Act in 1890, providing a foundation for antitrust laws globally. However, Chicago School economic theorists like Milton Friedman, and legal scholar Robert Bork, claimed that government interference in commerce was more damaging than helpful, attacking antitrust laws for protecting small businesses at the expense of households. Since the Reagan administration, antitrust laws have been mostly ignored, and lawmakers approve acquisitions without much scrutiny. Research reveals that higher prices are a result of market concentration, which shows little evidence of efficiency and productivity gains. This has enabled monopolistic drug patents to protect pharmaceutical corporations from competition. The antitrust paradox in the 2000s is that few outright monopolies exist. Instead, industry duopolies and oligopolies flourish, and the means of collusion are not well understood by consumers.

Want to read the full book summary?

Leave a Reply

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

Fill out this field
Fill out this field
Please enter a valid email address.
You need to agree with the terms to proceed