Government intervention in the context of "Coercive monopoly"

Play Trivia Questions online!

or

Skip to study material about Government intervention in the context of "Coercive monopoly"

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Government intervention

A market intervention is a policy or measure that modifies or interferes with a market, typically done in the form of state action, but also by philanthropic and political-action groups. Market interventions can be done for a number of reasons, including as an attempt to correct market failures, or more broadly to promote public interests or protect the interests of specific groups.

Economic interventions can be aimed at a variety of political or economic objectives, including but not limited to promoting economic growth, increasing employment, raising wages, raising or reducing prices, reducing income inequality, managing the money supply and interest rates, or increasing profits. A wide variety of tools can be used to achieve these aims, such as taxes or fines, state owned enterprises, subsidies, or regulations such as price floors and price ceilings.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<

πŸ‘‰ Government intervention in the context of Coercive monopoly

In economics and business ethics, a coercive monopoly is a firm that is able to raise prices and make production decisions without the risk that competition will arise to draw away their customers. A coercive monopoly is not merely a sole supplier of a particular kind of good or service (a monopoly), but it is a monopoly where there is no opportunity to compete with it through means such as price competition, technological or product innovation, or marketing; entry into the field is closed. As a coercive monopoly is securely shielded from the possibility of competition, it is able to make pricing and production decisions with the assurance that no competition will arise. It is a case of a non-contestable market. A coercive monopoly has very few incentives to keep prices low and may deliberately price gouge consumers by curtailing production.

Coercive monopolies can arise in free market or via government intervention to institute them. Some conservative think tanks, such as the Foundation for Economic Education, define coercive monopolies solely as those established by the government or via the illegal use of force, excluding monopolies that arise in the free market.

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier

Government intervention in the context of Economic liberalism

Economic liberalism is a political and economic ideology that supports a market economy based on individualism and private property in the means of production. Adam Smith is considered one of the primary initial writers on economic liberalism, and his writing is generally regarded as representing the economic expression of 19th-century liberalism up until the Great Depression and rise of Keynesianism in the 20th century. Historically, economic liberalism arose in response to feudalism and mercantilism.

Economic liberalism is associated with markets and private ownership of capital assets. Economic liberals tend to oppose government intervention and protectionism in the market economy when it inhibits free trade and competition, but tend to support government intervention where it protects property rights, opens new markets or funds market growth, and resolves market failures. They also tend to oppose cartels, monopolies, financialization of the economy, rent-seeking behaviour and unproductive classes reliant on rent, assets or state-granted privileges. An economy that is managed according to these precepts may be described as a liberal economy or operating under liberal capitalism. Economic liberals commonly adhere to a political and economic philosophy that advocates a restrained fiscal policy and a balanced budget through measures such as low taxes, reduced government spending, and minimized government debt. Free trade, deregulation, tax cuts, privatization, labour market flexibility, and opposition to trade unions are also common positions.

↑ Return to Menu

Government intervention in the context of Right-libertarianism

Right-libertarianism, usually referred to as libertarian capitalism by its proponents and right-wing libertarianism by its opponents, is a libertarian political philosophy that supports capitalist property rights and market distribution of natural resources. The term right-libertarianism is used to distinguish this class of views on the nature of property and capital from left-libertarianism, a variant of libertarianism that combines self-ownership with collectivist or usufructary property norms. In contrast to socialist libertarianism, capitalist libertarianism supports free-market capitalism. Like other forms of libertarianism, it supports civil liberties, especially natural law, negative rights, the non-aggression principle, and a significant transformation or outright elimination of the modern welfare state.

Right-libertarian political thought is characterized by the strict priority given to liberty, with the need to maximize the realm of individual freedom and minimize the scope of government authority. Right-libertarians typically see the state as the principal threat to liberty. This anti-statism differs from anarcho-socialist theory (but not individualist anarchist theory) in that it is based upon private property norms and strong individualism that places less emphasis on human sociability or cooperation. Right-libertarian philosophy is also rooted in the ideas of individual rights and laissez-faire economics. The right-libertarian theory of individual rights generally follows the homestead principle and the labor theory of property, stressing self-ownership and that people have an absolute right to the property that their labor produces. Economically, right-libertarians make no distinction between capitalism and free markets; they view any attempt to dictate the market process as counterproductive, emphasizing the mechanisms and self-regulating nature of the market whilst portraying government intervention and attempts to redistribute wealth as criminally immoral, unnecessary, and counter-productive. Although all right-libertarians oppose government intervention, there is a division between anarcho-capitalists, who view the state as an unnecessary evil and want property rights protected without statutory law through market-generated tort, contract and property law; and minarchists, who support the need for a minimal state, often referred to as a night-watchman state, to provide its citizens with monopoly provision of courts, military, and police services.

↑ Return to Menu

Government intervention in the context of Positive non-interventionism

Positive non-interventionism (Chinese: 積ζ₯΅δΈεΉ²ι ) was the economic policy of Hong Kong; this policy can be traced back to the time when Hong Kong was under British rule. It was first officially implemented in 1971 by Financial Secretary of Hong Kong John Cowperthwaite, influenced by Arthur Grenfell Clarke and Geoffrey Follows which believed that the economy was doing well in the absence of government intervention but that it was important to create the regulatory and physical infrastructure to facilitate market-based decision making. The policy was continued by subsequent Financial Secretaries, including Sir Philip Haddon-Cave. Economist Milton Friedman has cited it as a fairly comprehensive implementation of laissez-faire policy. While other describe it as an variant of corporatism or even as a mixed economic system.

↑ Return to Menu

Government intervention in the context of Paleolibertarianism

Paleolibertarianism (also known as the "Paleo strategy") is a right-libertarian political activism strategy aimed at uniting libertarians and paleoconservatives. It was developed by American anarcho-capitalist theorists Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell in the American political context after the end of the Cold War. From 1989 to 1995, they sought to communicate libertarian notions of opposition to government intervention by using messages accessible to the working class and middle class people of the time. They combined libertarian free market views with the cultural conservatism of paleoconservatism, while also opposing protectionism. The strategy also embraced the paleoconservative reverence for tradition and religion. This approach, usually identified as right-wing populism, was intended to radicalize citizens against the state. The name they chose for this style of activism evoked the roots of modern libertarianism, hence the prefix paleo. That founding movement was American classical liberalism, which shared the anti-war and anti-New Deal sentiments of the Old Right in the first half of the 20th century. Paleolibertarianism is generally seen as a right-wing ideology.

The paleolibertarian strategy was expected to shift the libertarian movement away from the influence of public policy-oriented libertarian organizations based in Washington, D.C. (who were accused of giving up on communicating the complete libertarian message and of adopting the political and cultural values inside the Beltway to gain acceptance among the political elite); and to simultaneously shift American right-wing politics away from the neoconservative movement and its promotion of hawkish or interventionist foreign policy usually characterized as imperialist by libertarian thinkers.

↑ Return to Menu

Government intervention in the context of James Tobin

James Tobin (March 5, 1918 – March 11, 2002) was an American economist who served on the Council of Economic Advisers and consulted with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and taught at Yale University. He contributed to the development of key ideas in the Keynesian economics of his generation and advocated government intervention in particular to stabilize output and avoid recessions. His academic work included pioneering contributions to the study of investment, monetary and fiscal policy and financial markets. He also proposed an econometric model for censored dependent variables, the well-known tobit model.

Along with fellow neo-Keynesian economist James Meade in 1977, Tobin proposed nominal GDP targeting as a monetary policy rule in 1980. Tobin received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 1981 for "creative and extensive work on the analysis of financial markets and their relations to expenditure decisions, employment, production and prices."

↑ Return to Menu