A few months ago I went to NYC to see a friend of mine who works in finance. We were talking about getting rid of big government and the conversation moved toward monopoly regulation. He thought that in truly free society business wouldn't be regulated at all. On the other hand, I believe in anti-monopoly laws like the Sherman Act because of the problems that arise with monopoly. With that said, how can I hold that government should stay out of our business and yet hold the view that corporations need limits? He asked me the same question.
I believe my response was something about how I believe the government must deal with some externality effects. For instance, no corporation, in need of better transport, would ever have been able to make the highway system to get their goods to market. They would have to front all the money and then everyone would use them free of charge (tolls would hardly be practical). An even better example used often is about an area with a mosquito problem where a pond needs to be sprayed but there is no incentive for anyone to do so since all the others will benefit for no financial outlay of their own.
How this applies to monopoly (or oligarchy for that matter) is in situations of market failure (monopoly). A monopoly uses a public good (the public themselves, aka the market) to take benefit while not allowing anyone else in. Hence, my conclusion was that this was bad for the economy and unfair overall so it must be eliminated.
I still wasn't that satisfied with that answer though. I recently have been looking at the structure of the ruling body and found if plagues with corporate interference on a level I never would have thought months ago. I now see government and big corporations (yes loosely defined, but we'll get there) as something that requires control, lest there be repression of the masses.
Now don't think I've gone liberal and anti-business - far from it. What I see is a similarity between government and large corporations. To clearly demonstrate what I mean, lets go back to the beginning of our country.
In 1606, The first corporation was formed by charter of the King of England, The Virginia Company. Their task was to establish colonies in the Virginia territories. The were given the right to establish a governing council, but final say was in the hands of the Crown. This is interesting because it shows how government and corporations are actually very related and not at all dissimilar.
Governments and corporations share many features. For example, they both must answer to a board of overseers and shareholders. In a company, they are called the Board of Directors and they represent the Stockholders (and are themselves). In a government (democracy), the names are Legislature and they represent the Citizenry (which they must be to serve in office). Both types of organizations' leaders need popular support of the mass body to prevent being taken over in a hostile takeover (literally and figuratively).
Corporations are given much more leeway than the government, and I believe it should remain that way. This is because no matter how big they are they still do not exist to benefit the people like the government does, and therefore, they do not have to be held as accountable. For example, the Board of a company are often the major shareholders. Whereas, in Congress the representatives are not supposed to have any interests beyond that of a basic citizen.
Now, allow me to introduce the crux of my argument. I believe that the corporations and government are intermixing their roles - the result of which is not at all beneficial. The Congressmen are increasing their financial interests, and at the same time the corporations are controlling more of our lives. It has been said, and is true today as it's always been that ,"he who controls all the money, controls the world." Without this becoming a rant on the Federal Reserve System and the fiat Dollar, it should be mentioned that the government and big business are very much blending together more than ever before.
It is well accepted amongst libertarians and paleo-conservatives that government is a necessary evil that must exist, but which must be looked after quite closely. For, unchecked, it can lead to such villainous tyranny. So, when the government and the corporate set align we are doubly threatened. Not just by those we elect, but by those who elect themselves. It is truly the latter who control this country, and not the former. The former are just the puppets of the Oligarchy. They are given some "power" to do the bidding of the ones who actually wield the scepter of rule.
Therefore, I will continue to support the law that ensures that no corporation will attain too much control over the American people, however fruitless that may be.
