
“But, they insisted, they weren’t arguing in favor of a monopoly in the ferry business — no, they pointed out that their permit actually required them to run more frequent ferries if demand so warranted. Therefore there was no danger of a monopoly, because they could be trusted to operate more ferries if need be. This proved that there was no necessity for a new ferry company to compete against them, and that the government should not have granted the second company a permit. This is precisely the same argument made today by existing taxi monopolists who oppose the introduction of Uber and other ride-sharing companies.”
http://fee.org/anythingpeaceful/detail/uber-vs-the-state-1851-edition
Related posts:
Robert P. Murphy: The Economics of Bitcoin
Freedom and Servitude: Could You Have Answered This Question?
Think Twice Before Accepting Bank Transfers For Online Payment
Think Government Is Intrusive Now? Wait Until E-Verify Kicks In
Learn Bobby Tay’s $2.7 Trillion Sigma Secret
Bitcoin: The People's Money with Roger Ver and Jeffrey Tucker
A congressional speech on the centennial of the Expatriation Act of 1868
"I'm Going to Take Him Out"
Bill Bonner: Why the Fed’s ‘Taper’ Won’t Work
Not Your Father's Stock Market Anymore
Bruce Schneier: Why are we spending $7 billion per year on TSA?
Yes, Virginia, Social Security Really Is Going Bankrupt.
Perfecting Tyranny: Foreign War as Experimentation in State Control
Warren Buffett: How inflation swindles the equity investor [1977]
Why Does Monsanto Always Win?