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. Every year, new antitrust prosecutions arise in the U.S. courts, as in the cases against 3M and Visa/MasterCard, as well as a number of ongoing antitrust cases, such as those involving Microsoft and college football's use of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS). Gary Hull and the contributing authors show that these cases--as well as the Sherman Anti-Trust Act itself--are based on an erroneous interpretation of the history of American business, premised on bad economics. They equivocate between economic and political power--the power to produce versus the power to use physical force. For Hull, anti-trust prosecutions are based on a horrible moral inversion: that it is acceptable to sacrifice America's best producers. The contributors explain how key antitrust ideas, for instance, "monopoly," "restraint of trade," and "anticompetitive behavior," have been used to justify prosecution, and then make clear why those ideas are false. They sketch the historical, legal, economic, and moral reasoning that gave rise to the passage and growth of antitrust legislation. All of the theoretical points in this volume are woven around a number of fascinating cases, both historical and current--including the Charles River Bridge, Alcoa, General Electric, and Kellogg/General Mills. This is a dynamic and accessible work that is not simply a polemical argument for a particular policy position. 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.

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. Every year, new antitrust prosecutions arise in the U.S. courts, as in the cases against 3M and Visa/MasterCard, as well as a number of ongoing antitrust cases, such as those involving Microsoft and college football's use of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS). Gary Hull and the contributing authors show that these cases-as well as the Sherman Antitrust Act itself-are based on an erroneous interpretation of the history of American business, premised on bad economics. They equivocate between economic and political power-the power to produce versus the power to use physical force. For Hull, antitrust prosecutions are based on a horrible moral inversion: that it is acceptable to sacrifi ce America's best producers. The contributors explain how key antitrust ideas, for instance, "monopoly," "restraint of trade," and "anticompetitive behavior," have been used to justify prosecution, and then make clear why those ideas are false. They sketch the historical, legal, economic, and moral reasoning that gave rise to the passage and growth of antitrust legislation. All of the theoretical points in this volume are woven around a number of fascinating cases, both historical and current-including the Charles River Bridge, Alcoa, General Electric, and Kellogg/General Mills. Designed for the uninformed but educated layman, The Abolition of Antitrust makes positive arguments in defense of wealth creation, business, and profi t, explains the proper role of government, and offers a rational view of the meaning of contract and economic freedom. AldineTransaction www.transactionpub.com ISBN: 978-1-4128-0502-5 Library of Congress: 2004058124 Printed in the U.S.A. Cover design by Ellen F. Kane "The essays in this book present a sustained economic, historical, moral, and legal broadside against the various federal statutes known as antitrust doctrine. They explode the cherished myths underlying the antitrust laws, and expose their intellectual fountainhead in a morality of self-sacrifice that is incompatible with individual rights, free enterprise, and objective law. With the publication of this text, businessmen, lawyers, economists, policymakers, legislators, and judges finally have access to a systemic critique of the antitrust laws. From here on, if antitrust continues to violate the rights of businessmen and to ravage the American economy, it is not for lack of knowing how and why."-Adam Mossoff, assistant professor of law, Michigan State University College of Law

"The essays in this book present a sustained economic, historical, moral, and legal broadside against the various federal statutes known as antitrust doctrine. They explode the cherished myths underlying the antitrust laws, and expose their intellectual fountainhead in a morality of self-sacrifice that is incompatible with individual rights, free enterprise, and objective law. With the publication of this text, businessmen, lawyers, economists, policy makers, legislators, and judges finally have access to a systemic critique of the antitrust laws. From here on, if antitrust continues to violate the rights of businessmen and to ravage the American economy, it is not for lack of knowing how and why."--Adam Mossoff, Assistant Professor of Law, Michigan State University 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. Every year, new antitrust prosecutions arise in the U.S. courts, as in the cases against 3M and Visa/MasterCard, as well as a number of ongoing antitrust cases, such as those involving Microsoft and college football's use of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS). Gary Hull and the contributing authors show that these cases--as well as the Sherman Anti-Trust Act itself--are based on an erroneous interpretation of the history of American business, premised on bad economics. They equivocate between economic and political power--the power to produce versus the power to use physical force. For Hull, anti-trust prosecutions are based on a horrible moral inversion: that it is acceptable to sacrifice America's best producers. The contributors explain how key antitrust ideas, for instance, "monopoly," "restraint of trade," and "anticompetitive behavior," have been used to justify prosecution, and then make clear why those ideas are false. They sketch the historical, legal, economic, and moral reasoning that gave rise to the passage and growth of antitrust legislation. All of the theoretical points in this volume are woven around a number of fascinating cases, both historical and current--including the Charles River Bridge, Alcoa, General Electric, and Kellogg/General Mills. This is a dynamic and accessible work that is not simply a polemical argument for a particular policy position. 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. Gary Hull is director of the Program on Values and Ethics in the Marketplace (VEM) at Duke University, and has taught philosophy and business ethics at the Fuqua School of Business, Whittier College, and the Claremont Graduate School. He is coeditor of The Ayn Rand Reader.

"The essays in this book present a sustained economic, historical, moral, and legal broadside against the various federal statutes known as antitrust doctrine. They explode the cherished myths underlying the antitrust laws, and expose their intellectual fountainhead in a morality of self-sacrifice that is incompatible with individual rights, free enterprise, and objective law. With the publication of this text, businessmen, lawyers, economists, policy makers, legislators, and judges finally have access to a systemic critique of the antitrust laws. From here on, if antitrust continues to violate the rights of businessmen and to ravage the American economy, it is not for lack of knowing how and why."--Adam Mossoff, Assistant Professor of Law, Michigan State University 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. Every year, new antitrust prosecutions arise in the U.S. courts, as in the cases against 3M and Visa/MasterCard, as well as a number of ongoing antitrust cases, such as those involving Microsoft and college football's use of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS). Gary Hull and the contributing authors show that these cases--as well as the Sherman Anti-Trust Act itself--are based on an erroneous interpretation of the history of American business, premised on bad economics. They equivocate between economic and political power--the power to produce versus the power to use physical force. For Hull, anti-trust prosecutions are based on a horrible moral inversion: that it is acceptable to sacrifice America's best producers. The contributors explain how key antitrust ideas, for instance, "monopoly," "restraint of trade," and "anticompetitive behavior," have been used to justify prosecution, and then make clear why those ideas are false. They sketch the historical, legal, economic, and moral reasoning that gave rise to the passage and growth of antitrust legislation. All of the theoretical points in this volume are woven around a number of fascinating cases, both historical and current--including the Charles River Bridge, Alcoa, General Electric, and Kellogg/General Mills. This is a dynamic and accessible work that is not simply a polemical argument for a particular policy position. 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. Gary Hull is director of the Program on Values and Ethics in the Marketplace (VEM) at Duke University, and has taught philosophy and business ethics at the Fuqua School of Business, Whittier College, and the Claremont Graduate School. He is coeditor of The Ayn Rand Reader.

From the man who coined the term "net neutrality" and who has made significant contributions to our understanding of antitrust policy and wireless communications, comes a call for tighter antitrust enforcement and an end to corporate bigness.

A new and urgently needed guide to making the American economy more competitive at a time when tech giants have amassed vast market power. The U.S. economy is growing less competitive. Large businesses increasingly profit by taking advantage of their customers and suppliers. These firms can also use sophisticated pricing algorithms and customer data to secure substantial and persistent advantages over smaller players. In our new Gilded Age, the likes of Google and Amazon fill the roles of Standard Oil and U.S. Steel. Jonathan Baker shows how business practices harming competition manage to go unchecked. The law has fallen behind technology, but that is not the only problem. Inspired by Robert Bork, Richard Posner, and the “Chicago school,” the Supreme Court has, since the Reagan years, steadily eroded the protections of antitrust. The Antitrust Paradigm demonstrates that Chicago-style reforms intended to unleash competitive enterprise have instead inflated market power, harming the welfare of workers and consumers, squelching innovation, and reducing overall economic growth. Baker identifies the errors in economic arguments for staying the course and advocates for a middle path between laissez-faire and forced deconcentration: the revival of pro-competitive economic regulation, of which antitrust has long been the backbone. Drawing on the latest in empirical and theoretical economics to defend the benefits of antitrust, Baker shows how enforcement and jurisprudence can be updated for the high-tech economy. His prescription is straightforward. The sooner courts and the antitrust enforcement agencies stop listening to the Chicago school and start paying attention to modern economics, the sooner Americans will reap the benefits of competition.