Truth on the market
Why the market crashed today | the truth.
It helps to be able to brandish straightforward and succinct debating points in favor of a proposition that is backed up by strong analysis in a war of ideas. To that end, I offer four arguments to reject neo-Brandeisian criticisms of the consensus (at least until recently) consumer welfare-centric approach to antitrust regulation in a recent primer published by the Mercatus Center. The following are my four observations, which I derived from the primer (with citations removed and hyperlinks added):
Efforts to completely reshape antitrust policy into a quasi-regulatory framework that arbitrarily blocks and disincentivizes (1) welfare-enhancing mergers and (2) a variety of dominant firm activities are extremely concerning. Such interventionist policies sound arbitrary in comparison to the current consumer-welfare-centric antitrust regulatory system, which ignores the lack of evidence of significant competitive issues in the American economy. To use an analogy, Congress and government officials should stop instituting a radical new antitrust treatment for an anticompetitive illness that can be easily treated with current antitrust drugs.
The truth about the markets
HERMES has gathered the information on this website from external and internal sources to the best of its experience and belief, and has done so with due diligence. We strive to expand and update the scope of knowledge on a regular basis. This website’s content is solely intended to reflect HERMES and its products and services. However, we make no representations or warranties about the completeness or quality of the information on this website, either express or implied. You should be mindful, in particular, that this information might no longer be accurate. As a result, you should double-check any details you receive from this website before using it in any way. The advice on this website does not absolve you of the obligation of independently verifying the suitability of our most recent tips and items for the purposes intended. Please contact us directly if you need specific advice or guidance about our products or services.
7 ugly truth about stock market that you should know
The American business model – unfettered self-interest, privatization, and low tax – faced a storm of protest at the end of the 1990s as companies were rattled by fraud, the stock market bubble exploded, and the American business model – unfettered self-interest, privatization, and low tax – faced a storm of protest. But what are the alternatives to market fundamentalism’s mantras? From Wall Street to Main Street, leading economist John Kay reveals the facts about markets.
The American business model – unfettered self-interest, privatization, and low tax – faced a storm of protest at the end of the 1990s as companies were rattled by fraud, the stock market bubble exploded, and the American business model – unfettered self-interest, privatization, and low tax – faced a storm of protest. But what are the alternatives to market fundamentalism’s mantras? Leading economist John Kay examines why some countries are wealthy and others are poor, why ‘one-size-fits-all’ globalization harms developed countries, and why markets can function – but only in a humane social and cultural sense, from Wall Street to Switzerland, from Russia to Mumbai. His responses include a revolutionary new blueprint for the future.
The truth about 1% a day in the stock market
Id. at 33. 10. Id. at 33. Of course, the truth rationale may be undermined to the point that it no longer assigns truth precedence over other values. We won’t go into detail about this because we’re just interested in the logical premise of the case from reality.
12. The freedom to enter the market does not imply that it is free. It means that incumbency does not generate rent, i.e., new agents will join at a cost that is not higher than incumbents’, and incumbents therefore do not have a competitive advantage over potential entrants.
13. Theorists like Cass Sunstein and Owen Fiss argue that there is no valid distinction between market and state control because the state establishes the property rights structure that underpins a market system. In section II, we’ll go over this topic in greater depth.
19. Other examples may be provided to show that both second and third parties will participate in the second type of regulation. We will not pursue this argument further because it is unimportant to our overall thesis.