more than a few introductory sections note the role of democratic governments in controlling predatory monopolies.
I didn't have in mind a monopoly business. I was addressing the government AS a monopoly "business." Government monopolies have the same problems as business monopolies in terms of unresponsiveness, bloating, loss of touch with the customer, wastefulness, poor product development and distribution, etc. but there's no one above them to control them. Do your sources offer ways to control a government monopoly? What about when in a democracy the majority of the voters are dependent upon that government monopoly to provide health care out of tax money? Don't think so. Eventually such monopolies just crash under their own ineptitude and woe to those who live in those interesting times.
I actually prefer government regulation, as in the present regulation for foods, drugs, etc., as we've talked about on this thread, to its absence.
I have nothing against government regulation. But we're not really talking just about regulation here. We have regulation now. We're not even just talking about centralizing that regulation at the federal level but federal command and control of a good chunk of the economy. That's something else entirely.
The concept of regulation is a government rein on the private sector in the interests of the public, it's customers. If there's no private sector, then the whole notion of regulation is rather silly. The regulation paradigm doesn't fit. What you have is more of an internal policy and procedures paradigm than a regulatory one. To the extent that you have a private sector, it's governed more in the contractor paradigm than the regulatory paradigm. That's a whole different world. Are there aren't Econ and Poli Sci books that deal with that? |
