Good Points and Initial Thoughts
The basis of the argument that we’re evaluating here, is that monopolies aren’t a problem in society. He begins describing it in a way I haven’t heard before, by saying that each person has a monopoly of their individual labor. The reason I want to point this out, because when he describes it like this, not only is it true, but it really isn’t a bad thing at all. When I heard monopoly, I always pictured it being at a corporate level, never on a basis so small. By that one simple statement, I think I was hooked into wanting to learn more about where he was coming from, allowing me to try and see his viewpoint.
He goes on to say that he believes monopolies can create more innovations, leading to competition which will produce greater products over all. He uses the iphone as an example here. Flip phones went out of business due to their products not being innovative, when the iphone came out, their product was able to better satisfy consumers than the flip phone could. It wasn’t due to a lack of marketing, but because the iphone was a better product. This argument implies that a monopoly can actually greatly serve consumers, depending on your perspective, because we will be offered better products because of it.
When looking at it this way, it seems less like the monopolies have total control over the market, because as soon as something better comes along they will no longer be a monopoly. It’s all about being the better business, offering a better product and a better deal for that product. It seems like at the end of the day, it’s very much the consumers that have the control here, not the monopolies we fear. There are competitors for just about every product out there, so it can really switch at the drop of that hat depending on what the next new, better, cheaper thing is offered.
I found his talk about taxis being a monopoly very interesting, as I never realized that they were one. It was an innovative idea that was able to break the monopolies and break them down, such as Uber and Lyft. This begs the question, are monopolies necessary so that new, innovative ideas can have a breakthrough, to break up the monopolies and greatly benefit the consumer? I doubt anyone would have thought of Uber or Lyft without realizing how much could be improved upon the taxi industry. It really highlights the possibilities that monopolies can drive innovation, which is a thought I’d never had before.
Thoughts On Competitors
Here in America, anyone can produce just about anything and can compete with others for just about any product. There’s knock-off products too for just about any designer product there. These competitors help drive the prices down.
A direct example that I can think of, is comparing gas prices in more rural places to those in cities. When you’re the only gas station for miles around, you can generally have higher prices because there’s usually not a direct competitor in the area.
Monopoly Power and Making Connections
So when figuring out what the problem is, it’s being said that monopolies aren’t the problem, but rather monopoly power is. However he said that this isn’t really a problem that we need to worry about. Although generally, it might not be something for everyone to worry about, there is one issue I can think of when power does seem to be in play and causing issues. The issue I want to bring up is the cost of insulin. The only way to get insulin is through a healthcare provider, and the price to buy insulin is currently through the roof. The profit that people make from selling insulin is also huge as well. Is this what a monopoly power looks like? There’s no competitor for these health care providers, beyond that of each other, and people quite literally need insulin to survive. It’s not something that people can survive without, and it’s causing people life-threatening difficulties. How am I expected to look at a monopoly in a positive light when regarding this point? But, is this a problem due to monopoly or due to the regulations we have in place? However, there seems to be three primary producers of insulin, meaning that they set the prices. Is this monopoly power? Or is this just an individual example of where a monopoly is a negative thing? This is a question I hope I can address before making further assumptions.
The speaker claims that the true issue we see, is barrier to entry. That’s when we would see prices skyrocket, and people getting taken advantage of. Is this the issue with insulin? Or are we waiting to see an innovative breakthrough where someone comes up with a cheaper idea, and everything we know is tuned on it’s axis. The issue I have here though, is that while we wait, lives are being lost. My opinion on this monopoly issue, is definitely up in the air, as I now think I have more questions that I want answered.