|
Ah, the cyclical nature of argument. My first post today was going to be about the way that something can be unfair, but legal, and therefore A-OK. I can't emphasise enough that I totally agree with you, I just wanted to play devil's lawyer and see what else I could learn.
To continue in this role (we'll call it the Dem POSition)...
Monopolies do not only attempt to dominate the market by forcing competition to exit it, but also attempt to prevent competition from entering the market. Your counterargument hinged on the fact that Halliburton doesn't have any competition anyway, and will therefore not have to exploit manager/govt relationships or other shady practices to maximise profit through monopolisation. However, as monopolies also attempt to prevent de novo firms from entering the market, Halliburton could be consolidating their position to prevent future competition. This is economically more damaging than running rival firms out of the market.
We can stop this 'argument' whenever you want.
Solid
|