Antitrust and Monopoly
The stated purpose of antitrust laws is to protect competition and the public interest. But do such laws actually restrict the competitive process, harming consumers and serving the special interests of a few politically-connected competitors? Is antitrust law a necessary defence against the predatory business practices of wealthy, entrenched corporations that dominate a market? Or does antitrust law actually work to restrain and restrict the competitive process, injuring the public it is supposed to protect? In this breakthrough study, professor Armentano thoroughly researches the classic cases in antitrust law and demonstrates a surprising gap between the stated aims of antitrust law and what it actually accomplishes in the real world. Instead of protecting competition, professor Armentano finds, antitrust law actually protects certain politically-favoured competitors. This is an essential work for anyone wishing to understand the limitations and problems of contemporary antitrust actions.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
THE LEGITIMACY OF ANTITRUST POLICY
COMPETITION THEORY AND
A Criticism of Neoclassical Competition
18 other sections not shown
Other editions - View all
advertising Alcoa alleged allocation aluminum American Tobacco antitrust laws antitrust policy argued bleach industry Borden brand buyers Caffey cents charge Chicago Clayton Act Clorox collusion commerce compete competitive process competitors concentration concerning conglomerate mergers conspiracy consumers contracts corporations Court decision criticism discounts District Court economic economists effect efficient electrical emphasis added entry existing fact Federal Trade Commission firms free market Harold Demsetz Ibid illegal increase independent ingot Judge Justice leased machines manufacturers market power market share ment merger misallocation monopoly power neoclassical nomic output percent perfectly competitive perspective petroleum potential prefabricated homes price discrimination price-fixing Procter product differentiation profits purchase railroad rates reason reduce refiners regulation restrain restrict retail Robinson-Patman Act salt sellers selling Senator Kefauver Sherman Act Shoe Machinery social sold Standard Oil substantial Supreme Court theory tion tying agreements U. S. Steel United Shoe violated welfare York