Perfect competition: A case of “market-failure”

Barnett, William; Block, Walter E.; Saliba, Michael

doi:10.22495/cocv2i4p6

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The mainstream computes four firm concentration ratios, and Herfindahl indices, and on the basis of them condemn large sized firms, even if they attained this status through purely market means; for a critique of this misbegotten analysis, see Anderson, et. al., 2001;Armentano, 1999;Barnett, et. al., 2005Barnett, et.…”

Section: Myth 6: Monopolies and Oligopolies Are Always Bad Because Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Econ 101 Killing America? A Critique of Atkinson and Lind, and Boettke

Block

Čekerevac²

2014

MEST

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Myth 6: Monopolies and Oligopolies Are Always Bad Because Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Econ 101 Killing America? A Critique of Atkinson and Lind, and Boettke

Block

Čekerevac²

2014

MEST

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There are thousands of taxicabs in New York City, but they all constitute a monopoly, since anyone competing with them will be punished by law. There are numerous doctors in the country, but they also constitute a monopoly, since it is 23 (Barnett, Block & Saliba, 2005); (Block, Barnett II & Wood, 2002); (DiLorenzo, 2011); (Gordon, 1997); (Hayek, 1964(Hayek, , 2010; (Lewin & Phelan, 1999); (Machovec,1995); (Reisman, 2005); (Rothbard, 1961); (Salerno, 2011); (Salin, 1996). 24 Note, we say "legal," not "costless."…”

Section: Firmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the case against antitrust, see, (Anderson, et al, 2001); (Armentano, 19999;(Barnett, et. al., 2005(Barnett, et.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal Numbers of Various Phenomena: Nations, People, Languages, Races, Marriage Partners

Block

Čekerevac

2013

FBIM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What are the optimal numbers or quantities of nations, people, languages, races, marriage partners, wealth, monies, criminals and other such phenomenon? This depends, of course, on the goals of the people answering this question. Two different perspectives will be employed in the present paper in order to wrestle with this question: the libertarian political philosophy, and what I shall categorize as prudential judgment, or economic welfare. For example, it would be unwieldy in the extreme, and unwise, to have a different monetary system for each of the some 7 billion inhabitants of earth; this would amount to no monetary system at all, or barter. Similarly, 7 billion different languages would mean communication would be impossible, surely not an ideal state of affairs from just about any perspective. But can we pin the numbers better down than this? That is the burden of the present paper.

show abstract

“…al. (2001),Armentano (1972Armentano ( , 1982Armentano ( , 1989Armentano ( , 1999,Armstrong (1982),Barnett, et al (2005Barnett, et al ( , 2007,Block (1977Block ( , 1982Block ( , 1994,Block and Barnett (2009),Boudreaux and DiLorenzo (1992), Costea…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Homogeneity, Heterogeneity, the Supply Curve, and Consumer Theory

Wysocki¹,

Block²

2019

QJAE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we try to wrestle with the triviality objection to the concept of the same good. If we define two resources as serving the same list of ends, then whether these items can be subsumed under the rubric of the “same good” revolves around how we conceive of ends. If ends are at least partly language-dependent, that is, the way of individuating ends depends on the level of generality with which we refer to them, then the notion of the same good seems trivial. In extreme cases, we can specify ends in such a manner that no two items would fall into the-same-good category. Or, we can construe ends so generally that all resources would be conceptualized as the same good for they would serve the same general ends; e.g., of benefitting their owners. After presenting the problem in detail, we study the implication of our construal of ends. We conclude by showing that the triviality objection cannot undermine Austrian subjectivism.

show abstract

Perfect competition: A case of “market-failure”

Cited by 17 publications

References 16 publications

Is Econ 101 Killing America? A Critique of Atkinson and Lind, and Boettke

Is Econ 101 Killing America? A Critique of Atkinson and Lind, and Boettke

Optimal Numbers of Various Phenomena: Nations, People, Languages, Races, Marriage Partners

Homogeneity, Heterogeneity, the Supply Curve, and Consumer Theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About