more consolidation means more efficiency.  I think that the Japanese
model was in the background of the thinking at the time.

On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 06:40:15PM -0500, Peter Hollings wrote:
> I might guess that the Bork theory aluded to had either of the following
> underpinnings: a) more concentration in US markets would allow higher profit
> margins there, enhancing the capability of subsidizing entry into foreign
> markets; or,  b) a "size matters" argument that the bigger you are, the more
> readily you can raise capital, etc.
>
> What was Bork's argument?  It would seem that, the nature of it would enable
> us to judge its "progressivity".  For example, the subsidy argument, by
> penalizing US consumers, wouldn't seem a progressive effect at all.
>
> What role the Japanese style of industrial organization and protectionism
> have to bear?
>
> Peter Hollings
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael
> Perelman
> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 6:12 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The economy - a new era?
>
>
> Actually, the Reagan years were more important.  The Chicago school,
> especially Robert Bork, made the case that antitrust hobbled American
> corporations in the international market.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 03:08:28PM -0800, Devine, James wrote:
> > my 2 kopeks: it was under Clinton (or perhaps under Bush I or even Reagan)
> that anti-trust was shelved. The idea was that with globalization of
> competition in product markets, anti-trust wasn't needed. Of course, not all
> products have globalized markets...
> >
> > ------------------------
> > Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] &  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Eugene Coyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 2:14 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: [PEN-L] The economy - a new era?
> > >
> > >
> > > Has the US economy entered a new era?
> > >
> > > It seems to me that the US Department of Justice, along with other
> > > relevant agencies, has lost interest in enforcing antitrust laws.
> > >
> > > I think we are back to the 1880s and 1890s, where "Trusts" and "pools"
> > > will rationalize capacity for the good of all?
> > >
> > > Banks and insurance companies agglomerate.  Electric power
> > > generation is
> > > falling into fewer and fewer hands, and those hands are more and more
> > > financial institutions.  Big oil gets bigger.  Big steel consolidates
> > > while the steel market sags.  ADM and Cargill thrive while
> > > the number of
> > > farmers shrinks.
> > >
> > > Am I generalizing from the worst possible input, anecdotal evidence?
> > >
> > > I've always loved anecdotal evidence -- I continue to believe what is
> > > before my eyes.  I believed that smoking cigarettes caused
> > > lung cancer.
> > > I still do, actually.
> > >
> > > But clue me in:  Are we moving to tight oligopoly everywhere
> > > in our economy?
> > >
> > > PEN-l doesn't much discuss economics, as Michael complains.
> > > But when it
> > > does, it discusses macro.  Anybody looking at market structure?
> > >
> > > Gene Coyle
> > >
>
> --
> Michael Perelman
> Economics Department
> California State University
> Chico, CA 95929
>
> Tel. 530-898-5321
> E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu

Reply via email to