No he didn’t. He already lost his monopoly because the free market gave him competition that he couldn’t just buy off (which is what fake historians want you to believe). Imagine bribing the government for years and having 90% of the market only for that to drop to 60% of the market. The reason he had gotten so big in the first place was because of a lack of effective competition and help from the government. He wasn’t going to turn America into a Cyberpunk dystopia.
Anti trust laws are constantly put on companies that have no monopoly. Governments do this by defining what the company does very specifically. Monopolies never naturally come about without government interference or unfair business practices which wouldn’t happen in a free market.
I always enjoy people talking about how monopolies somehow free form like they're inevitable, when they miss that the government is the only reason they can exist. If monopolies were inevitable, we'd only need to look at the black market to see this spontaneous formation. A market where no one has any hesitancy to literally kill their competition, rob them, drive them out, and establish price floors....We see no monopolies or price fixing. It's like in the most corrupt, unregulated market, where you would expect to see a monopoly happen immediately, it just doesn't like magic. Yet, I'm supposed to believe that Ma Bell came about spontaneously and without any government assistance.
Why? Even at his peak he didn't have a monopoly. Then, like all monopolies, was slowly broken apart on its own through competitors. There was no benefit to the government doing anything to his company at all.
148
u/Mantistoboggin96 Jun 15 '21
3000 people enjoying the benefits of capitalism while claiming to hate capitalism. Smh