[from WhoMakesTheBetterDecision]
----
Thus, for example, market controls exist to constrain monopolies. Although some theorists maintain that monopolies will 'naturally' be controlled in a truly free market, this has never been demonstrated. Nor, for that matter, has it been demonstrated that a truly free market is obtainable, or stable. So it is hardly surprising that some people are sceptical of the radical free marketists.

''What has never been demonstrated is that any monopoly can actually arise without the aid of government. While some people bandy around the term '''monopoly''' quite blithely in the Microsoft case, I don't believe it has ever been shown that Microsoft charges above its marginal costs for its products and, therefore, cannot be considered a monopoly. The only other cases of monopolies that I'm aware of involve government sanctioned monopolies such as telephone services, railroad companies, early coal companies''

This is simply not true. It has been demonstrated that monopolies are possible under a free market. Of course, this is only theoretical - but so is everything else about free markets because we have never seen one (and they may not be possible). I won't touch the MS stuff as it risks thread decay :)

''*chuckle* Well, not only do I agree with you about Microsoft stuff, the very fact that we have viable options is a strong indication that they are not a monopoly.''

''As for the veracity of my statement: In certain Keynesian models of macro-economies, monopolies can form, in particular the so-called natural monopolies. All of this is in Keynesian economic theory. Keynesian theory has been discredited for a while now and I don't believe anyone has ever observed one of these things in the wild. Any monopoly that has been observed exists because of some kind of government protection like preventing new market entrants or price controls. If you have an example of a real monopoly, please share it.''

I don't want to veer off into too much discussion of monopolies (at least not here). I should have made that clear with the last edit (in fact I did, but the update db problem bit me and I re-wrote a shorter version). The point I was trying to make was that market controls may be social contracts. BTW, if it is true that a monopoly is not possible in the wild, then it should hardly bother anyone if a control for them is in place. :)  
----
''if it is true that a monopoly is not possible in the wild, then it should hardly bother anyone if a control for them is in place.''

To this, I must vehemently disagree. Like the jackalope, even though natural monopolies do not actually exist, it does not prevent people from alleging that they saw one. Then, they use the threat of government violence to hinder the freedom of their competitors. Many people believe this is exactly what happened between Microsoft and Netscape.

----

''This is simply not true. It has been demonstrated that monopolies are possible under a free market.''

Where? When? Wouldn't you need to have access to a free market in order to determine whether or not this is the case?