“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:
To Lower Healthcare Costs, End The "Certificates Of Need" Racket
The Police State Mindset in Our Public Schools
A Letter to America from the Son of an American
Janet Yellen, the Nation's New Chief Slumlord
Ron Paul: Government Policies Hurt Low-Wage Workers
How Did Americans Survive Until 1892 Without the Pledge of Allegiance?
Ron Paul: Nixon’s Vindication
How to Survive When Prices Double Every Day and a Half
The Century of Arbitration and Peace
Is Size Overrated?
Obama Wins A Second Term: Now What?
Bauman’s Little Black Book of Buffoons
What Happens When You Can't Believe A Thing The President Says?
Bill Bonner: Repeat After Me - Economics Is NOT a Science
Bill Bonner: Three Major Market Events That WILL Happen