Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 353 posts

Re: Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

#101

Post by stinkytaco »

beemanners wrote: post #77
mozumder wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your point in your false equivalency? Are you implying that the 20 million people that now have medical coverage because of Democrats pushing for Obamacare isn't worth it? Was that all "talk"? I'm seriously trying to understand your "equivalency" position. Let me know what the Republicans would have done for health care? Right now it seems that the only thing they've done is to actually limit universal health…

20M on Obamacare != 20M who have health insurance because of Obamacare. Stop parroting CNN talking points and do your own research.

I don't find that a very enlightening point, but I will offer some real numbers. The widely cited 20 million is from the Congressional Budget Office, a non-partisan organization, not CNN, as you state [1]. And even if you chose to reject that, the number of health insurance policies purchased on exchanges in 2016 was 12.7 million and is expected to top 13 million this year, not an insignificant amount and not including the "ripple effect" that would create in the insurance market.

[1]: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52486

Re: Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

#102

Post by JackFr »

bko wrote: post #67
cs702 wrote: post #4

"I started a manufacturing company in Little Elm, about 35 miles north of Dallas, to produce the first-ever automatically retracting syringe to eliminate the risk of nurses contracting HIV through accidental needle sticks. The syringe received rave reviews from nurses, hospital executives and public health officials, a major grant from the National Institutes of Health and robust private investment. But when my partn…

> A market in which buyers are not free to choose better products is not a free market. Most businesses can choose better products (not sure about hospital industry). They can also choose to sign an agreement that makes a supplier relationship exclusive. For instance, a restaurant can sign an agreement to accept only Mastercard. Is this not a free market?

Yeah so the point is that if the only restaurant in the USA is Applebee's and they sign an exclusive agreement with Mastercard, they are extending their monopoly -- likely illegally in the US:

"But exclusive dealing also can be anticompetitive in some circumstances. For example, exclusive dealing may allow one manufacturer, in effect, to monopolize efficient distribution services and thereby prevent its rivals from competing effectively. As then-Judge Breyer explained, exclusive dealing can harm consumers by thwarting entry or inhibiting the growth of existing rivals:

'Exclusive dealing arrangements may sometimes be found unreasonable under the antitrust laws because they may place enough outlets, or sources of supply, in the hands of a single firm (or small group of firms) to make it difficult for new, potentially competing firms to penetrate the market. To put the matter more technically, the arrangements may "foreclose" outlets or supplies to potential entrants, thereby raising entry barriers. Higher entry barriers make it easier for existing firms to exploit whatever power they have to raise prices above the competitive level because they have less to fear from potential new entrants.'"

https://www.justice.gov/atr/competition-and-monopoly-single-...

Re: Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

#103

Post by leakybit »

cs702 wrote: post #4

"I started a manufacturing company in Little Elm, about 35 miles north of Dallas, to produce the first-ever automatically retracting syringe to eliminate the risk of nurses contracting HIV through accidental needle sticks. The syringe received rave reviews from nurses, hospital executives and public health officials, a major grant from the National Institutes of Health and robust private investment. But when my partn…

Quite frankly, auto retracting syringes suck ass, which is way 20+ years later, they're still not commonly used in healthcare facilities.

Re: Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

#104

Post by Qwertious »

skummetmaelk wrote: post #28
cs702 wrote: post #4

"I started a manufacturing company in Little Elm, about 35 miles north of Dallas, to produce the first-ever automatically retracting syringe to eliminate the risk of nurses contracting HIV through accidental needle sticks. The syringe received rave reviews from nurses, hospital executives and public health officials, a major grant from the National Institutes of Health and robust private investment. But when my partn…

That's the thing though, that is exactly what a late stage "free market" looks like. What you need is a heavily regulated market that prevents exactly this behaviour. People need to stop wishing for the "free" market. The term is abused by orators and manipulators who prey on peoples desire for a market which is free in the spirit of the word, and deliver to them a market which is technically "free" and horrible.

'People need to stop wishing for the "free" market. The term is abused by orators and manipulators who prey on peoples desire for a market which is free in the spirit of the word, and deliver to them a market which is technically "free" and horrible.'

Don't call it the free market. Call it what it is: COMPETITION.

"Free market" implies "I can do what I want", but frankly we don't WANT people to be free to pull anti-competitive shenanigans. Competition is the priority, not "the free market".

Re: Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

#105

Post by Qwertious »

shmerl wrote: post #91
zeusk wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're describing is a fair market, not a free one.

Free market means free from monopolies as well.

Nonsense. Free market means the ideal market of whatever one's personal ideology thinks will work best. It's the economic version of "a perfect world", and everyone has a different vision of what "a perfect world" even means.

Re: Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

#106

Post by Pica_soO »

cylinder wrote: post #56
IIIIIIIIIIII wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can speak for a different market in a different country (but I also lived in the US for a decade): IT freelancing in Germany. I get paid well, but there is something really strange going on: I can't get my contracts directly. I always have to go through a company whose sole business it is to be an intermediate between the (large) company that wants to hire a freelancer and the freelancer. Note that those freelancer…

When large corporations are comfortable in their revenue side (approaching monopoly) they obsess over risk. Every contract poses a risk, including litigation risk. That's probably why. GE is obsessed with outsourcing right now, they even outsourced the mail room. A side effect is this promotes inequality as you can no longer get a job in the mailroom and work your way up to CEO. See the hbr ideacast on this

Thank your for the explanation.

Re: Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

#108

Post by leakybit »

thriftwy wrote: post #7
cs702 wrote: post #4

"I started a manufacturing company in Little Elm, about 35 miles north of Dallas, to produce the first-ever automatically retracting syringe to eliminate the risk of nurses contracting HIV through accidental needle sticks. The syringe received rave reviews from nurses, hospital executives and public health officials, a major grant from the National Institutes of Health and robust private investment. But when my partn…

Not the first time this story is on HN. I always wondered - why focus on selling to American hospitals which could not care less? If the problem is universal, pitch to elite European hospitals, especially Swiss. They cater for rich patients from all around the world and if it's a good idea they'll definitely be interested. Later on, when it catches, American hospitals will come to you too. Or maybe you will find that…

Why even bother with hospitals and there bureaucracy. They could pitch it to doctors offices and the end users, like diabetics.

Re: Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

#109

Post by bluejekyll »

shmerl wrote: post #91
zeusk wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're describing is a fair market, not a free one.

Free market means free from monopolies as well.

Conversely, a free market is free for monopolies to form; is free to charge whatever they want; is free to block other companies from entering and selling to a company via any means short of bribery (although even that could be thought of as free); is free to to do anything when competing short of breaking the law.

We do not live in a free society, we are not free to do whatever we want; for example, I don't think anyone says we should be 'free' to murder anyone we want.

I think the GP is more accurate with fair. I'd actually say, it's a guaranteed to be 'open market' we want; meaning everyone must play by the same rules. Of course the challenge is that whoever sets the rules, will end up protecting their own interests, and then we end up where we are anyway. Maybe we can turn to AI to be absolutely fair in creating rules to establish open markets... and then AI becomes the pure benevolent dictator, except for that pesky off by one error I left lurking in the code :/

Re: Want to rescue rural America? Bust monopolies

#110

Post by adrianN »

kartan wrote: post #94
peacetreefrog wrote: post #9

Her two examples, the medical and agriculture sectors, are two of the most regulated industries around. A lot of these "monopolies" result because of regulation pushed by combination of well-meaning and self interested people and corporations (see bootleggers and baptists). Her examples suggest it'd be better to focus on the marriage between corporations and government, which allows companies to focus their energy on…

> "regulations are supported both by groups that want the ostensible purpose of the regulation, and by groups that profit from undermining that purpose." Wikipedia Yes, we should stop the people that want to undermine the purpose of regulations. Regulations are critical to assure the safety of our medicines and of what we eat. But we need to pay more attention to the abuses, and to separate the well-needed regulation…

In many cases the most qualified people to say what should be regulated and how work for the companies that would be affected by the regulation.
Post reply on HN