What do you think?
Rate this book
The Abolition of Antitrust
"The Abolition of Antitrust asserts that antitrust laws - on economic, legal, and moral grounds - are bad, and provides convincing evidence supporting arguments for their total abolition." Designed for the uninformed but educated layman, The Abolition of Antitrust also makes positive arguments in defense of wealth creation, business, and profit, explains the proper role of government, and offers a rational view of the meaning of contract and economic freedom.
188 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 25, 2005
2 people are currently reading
20 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
June 8, 2019
The Abolition of Antitrust is a collection of essays that will make you think—in places by turning your traditional concept of ethics on its head, and in others by applying logical and philosophical arguments against regulation regimes that we take for granted. However, the selected essays can be a little repetitive and often fail to offer an important counterpoint by presenting their opponents' arguments in the best light. The essays ask one fundamental question: "Why should businesses who are successful be punished for their success, if they didn't employ force to achieve it?"
Their answer, that they shouldn't, would be more compelling if the authors presented strong economic analysis and empirical evidence. When looking at a market that has been trust-busted are consumers better off? Or are they worse off as the book implies. I'd like to see some data. In fact I'd like to see a lot of data to be convinced. Instead, we get a lot of fairly strong philosophical arguments, but ultimately just that—philosophy, rather than real world data.
Ultimately, I did not walk away from the book convinced that all anti-trust is a bad thing. I did walk away convinced that perhaps anti-trust laws have too broad a scope and are applied too vigorously. But when you read a book with an extreme premise, it's a success in its persuasion if it takes your opinion from mainstream to somewhere between mainstream and its eccentricity.
Their answer, that they shouldn't, would be more compelling if the authors presented strong economic analysis and empirical evidence. When looking at a market that has been trust-busted are consumers better off? Or are they worse off as the book implies. I'd like to see some data. In fact I'd like to see a lot of data to be convinced. Instead, we get a lot of fairly strong philosophical arguments, but ultimately just that—philosophy, rather than real world data.
Ultimately, I did not walk away from the book convinced that all anti-trust is a bad thing. I did walk away convinced that perhaps anti-trust laws have too broad a scope and are applied too vigorously. But when you read a book with an extreme premise, it's a success in its persuasion if it takes your opinion from mainstream to somewhere between mainstream and its eccentricity.
Want to read
February 11, 2012via James Steele II, contributing author: Eric Daniels
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews