
“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:
Central Planning Ignores the Needs of Women
Attempts To Eliminate Cash Are More Than A Privacy Disaster
Factory-Like Schools Are the Child Labor Crisis of Today
Nasser Al-Awlaki: The Drone That Killed My Grandson
The Road to the Permanent Warfare State, Part 12 - Gregory Bresiger
A congressional speech on the centennial of the Expatriation Act of 1868
Privacy in the Face of NSA Abuse
Profits and Asset Bubbles Everywhere?
Anthony Gregory: The Right & the Drug War
I Only Regret That I Have But One Life to Give for My Country: Yours
Bill Bonner: The war on the young
The Unbearable Truth About Infrastructure and Urban Sprawl
US Interest Rates Will Continue to Rise
Will Grigg: Why is it a “Crime” to Disarm a Uniformed Aggressor?
The $4 Trillion Money Printing Press