Skip to main content

What market failure?

The front page of today's print FT reveals a masthead intro for yet another article/editorial on the supposed "market failure" that has brought about the recent global financial panic and a synchronized world recession.

Rather than bore you with the details of the entire piece, entitled, "Let us put markets to the service of the good society", allow me to reproduce one excerpt which purports to show that "market-generated monopolies" have driven out smaller competitors and led to the growth of "too big to fail" firms in banking and retail.

The following is the author's description of the modern oligopoly system at work in retail shopping today:

"If markets tend to monopoly, creating banks too big to fail, it follows that similar cartels exist elsewhere. Indeed, such “Chicago school” monopolies predominate.

In Britain, four supermarkets control more than 70 per cent of food retailing, while in the US, Wal-Mart has eviscerated competition. Local businesses from pubs to post offices are eroded by conglomerates that benefit from hidden subsidies and whose costs to society are not priced in. They out-compete everything else on economies of scale."

There is no question that the large chain stores have come to dominate the American retail landscape. But is this a good example of a market-generated monopoly or a "market failure" at work?

As Timothy Carney and economist Robert Higgs would point out, the success of a firm like Wal-Mart might actually highlight big business' skillfull use of government and taxpayer subsidies and business regulations in defraying operating costs and reducing competition.

As both Carney and Higgs illustrate in their discussions on the alliance of big business and big government, these companies and the "too big to fail" financial firms are not, as popularly supposed, true champions of laissez faire economics. They are merely opportunists who will use free-market rhetoric when it suits their purpose and cry out for government assistance when the threat of failure (or even just a bit of honest competition) looms.

Related articles and posts:

1. Tim Carney on big business & big government - Finance Trends.

2. Boudreaux on market failure, government failure - Econtalk.

Popular posts from this blog

The Dot-Com Bubble in 1 Chart: InfoSpace

With all the recent talk of a new bubble in the making, thanks in part to the Yellen Fed's continued easy money stance , I thought it'd be instructive to revisit our previous stock market bubble - in one quick chart. So here's what a real stock market bubble looks like.  Here's what a bubble *really* looks like. InfoSpace in 1999-2001. $QQQ $BCOR pic.twitter.com/xjsMk433H7 — David Shvartsman (@FinanceTrends) February 24, 2015   For those of you who are a little too young to recall it, this is a chart of InfoSpace at the height of the Nasdaq dot-com bubble in 1999-2001. This fallen angel soared to fantastic heights only to plummet back down to earth as the bubble, and InfoSpace's shady business plan , turned to rubble. As detailed in our post, " Round trip stocks: Momentum booms and busts ", InfoSpace rocketed from under $100 a share to over $1,300 a share in less than six months.  In a pattern common to many parabolic shooting stars, the s

Jesse Livermore: How to Trade in Stocks (1940 Ed. E-book)

If you've been around markets for any length of time, you've probably heard of 20th century supertrader, Jesse Livermore . Today we're highlighting his rare 1940 work, How to Trade in Stocks (ebook, pdf). But first, a brief overview of Livermore's life and trading career (bio from Jesse Livermore's Wikipedia entry). "During his lifetime, Livermore gained and lost several multi-million dollar fortunes. Most notably, he was worth $3 million and $100 million after the 1907 and 1929 market crashes, respectively. He subsequently lost both fortunes. Apart from his success as a securities speculator, Livermore left traders a working philosophy for trading securities that emphasizes increasing the size of one's position as it goes in the right direction and cutting losses quickly. Ironically, Livermore sometimes did not follow his rules strictly. He claimed that lack of adherence to his own rules was the main reason for his losses after making his 1907 and

New! Finance Trends now at FinanceTrendsLetter.com

Update for our readers: Finance Trends has a new URL!  Please bookmark our new web address at Financetrendsletter.com Readers sticking with RSS updates should point your feed readers to our new Finance Trends feedburner .   Thank you to all of our loyal readers who have been with us since the early days. Exciting stuff to come in the weeks ahead! As a quick reminder, you can subscribe to our free email list to receive the Finance Trends Newsletter . You'll receive email updates about once every 4-8 weeks (about 2-3 times per quarter).  Stay up to date with our real-time insights and updates on Twitter .