Last updated: May 19, 2009 - 8:19am
[Commentary] The Obama administration recently signaled a new, tougher antitrust policy. But the free market does not need more strict antitrust policy; it needs simple protection from fraud. The problem is that, in the 119 years that antitrust laws have existed, there is little empirical evidence that "vigorous enforcement" of them can promote the interests of consumers. And it was for the alleged benefit of the consumers that the laws were created. Indeed, antitrust history is riddled with silly theories and absurd cases that themselves have restricted and restrained free-market competition and hampered an efficient allocation of resources. A look at a few examples is reason to believe that President Obama's antitrust regulation won't be any different.
[Armentano is a research fellow of the Independent Institute.]
Links to Sources
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Related
- Stakes high as Congress returns
- New GOP telecom team decries FCC process
- DOJ is likely to lose e-book antitrust suit targeting Apple
- No More Landlines
- Melissa Hathaway urges simple, straight talk on cybersecurity
- Ads Prove Broadband Competition, Verizon tells FCC
- Obama Wrote Federal Staffers About His Goals
- Nonprofit Groups to Push for Exceptions to Lobby Rule
- Recap -- Privacy and Data Security: Protecting Consumers in the Modern World
- Verizon and Google offer a joint policy proposal for an open Internet
- Obama tech adviser Susan Crawford plans departure
- Orszag emerges as key negotiator
- When politics and tech collide, everyone loses
- White House Office of Urban Affairs
- FCC Launches Remake Of Radio Spectrum Technology
Topics
Ratings
Login to rate this headline.

