In the same category

Monopolies are Bad

IMG Auteur
Published : March 19th, 2013
1003 words - Reading time : 2 - 4 minutes
( 1 vote, 5/5 )
Print article
  Article Comments Comment this article Rating All Articles  
Our Newsletter...
Category : Editorials

The government saw that monopolies were bad in 1890, over 123 years ago, when it passed the Sherman Act.

Monopolies happen in a competitive "free" market only when the monopolizer engages in many kinds of unfair business practices which are comparable to extortion, usually taking the form of some kind of threat such as, "carry our product, and not our competitors' products, or else!"  Microsoft and Standard Oil both engaged in these kinds of threats.  The companies should probably have been prosecuted for making threats, not for being monopolies, but the end result of being a monopoly was bad, too.

If there is to be a free market, that means that free market competition must be allowed, because competition is good for the consumer, as it drives down prices, and encourages improvements, and innovation.

I believe that it is bad theory to assume that only monopoly grants will encourage innovation, because that is merely a belief system, a false belief system, a system that is actually competing with the free market competition belief system, which, again, is just one more reason why monopoly grants are not compatible with free market libertarian economics. 

So, government granted monopolies are also bad.  But the government has a harder time recognizing that it is doing bad things.

The US government grants monopolies in several areas.  The most commonly recognized is the granting of patents, copyright, and perhaps even trademarks.  I read a nice article on that today, here:


But the article makes a mistake at the end of the lead paragraph:  "This way of thinking (mercantilism and granting of special trading privileges) eventually became discredited and virtually disappeared in all but one significant area – intellectual property (IP) in the form of copyright and patents."

Nope.  There is another area that has also not yet disappeared, and it's more significant that than all the others put together.

The US government has also granted a much bigger and more evil monopoly, the monopoly right to issue paper dollars to the Federal Reserve.  This monopoly is extraordinarily similar to the copyright monopoly grant. 

Nobody has a right to print similar looking paper to the paper that the Federal Reserve prints!  But they don't call it "copyright" violation, they use another name to confuse the issue, they call it counterfeiting. 

The funny thing is that the Federal Reserve is actually the one counterfeiting dollars, as they are counterfeiting the silver dollar, and the silver certificate, which was a promise to pay a silver dollar.


1: made in imitation of something else with intent to deceive : forged <counterfeit money>

The granting of monopoly power is unjust, whimsical, and therefore tyrannical.

Why should the Federal Reserve have the power to print money, but not you and me?  That's not fair.  Thus, it's arbitrary, unjust, evil, whimsical and tyrannical.

How much can money can the Federal Reserve issue?  It appears there are no limits.  This is unjust because the creation of new money robs every holder of money of it's value, and so, it's theft.  Thus, the granting of this power to the Federal Reserve is evil and tyrannical, just as the Federal Reserve itself it evil and tyrannical.

Aside.  Yes, Congress granted this power to the Fed.  But so do you and me, when we decide to hold dollars, because by holding dollars, we keep their monopoly power alive.  There is an alternative to us, that is to buy silver and gold.  We buy and sell silver and gold target="_blank" at

The power to grant patents and copyright and "regulate the value of the dollar" is right in the Constitution.  But without changing the Constitution, I must realize that a government that properly restrains itself does not need to exercise that bad power, especially if it is unjust to do so. 

Who is in favor of patents?  Obviously all business that have them.  That would probably be most large businesses, but not most small businesses.  Also, patent attorneys are for them.  Also, government likes it, as this grants power to the government, and what government willingly gives up power? 
Unfortunately, authors are also in favor of copyright, so these people who propagate ideas are generally not going to help spread this idea.  This means this area of truth has what appears to be an uphill battle.  But the internet is changing things.  I always let anyone share my articles!

Here's my intellectual problem.  I know that government granted monopolies are bad.  How do we change that?  I suspect one of the best ways is to inform silver and gold investors, and potential silver and gold investors and so, I am, with this article. 

The reason why is that in the future, silver and gold investors are going to be the richest and most powerful group in society, especially as the Fed prints more and more.  But also, eventually, Congress or an Executive might just put the Fed out of business some day.  This becomes increasingly likely as the Fed continues to harm the nation, and will do in the future as it continues to devalue the dollar at a faster and faster rate.

Relating all of this back to silver and gold, the government has passed laws, and big banking companies are engaged in fraudulent offerings of silver and gold, that make it harder to use silver and gold in trade.  See, they are attempting to restrict the natural free market competition of silver and gold, to protect the monopoly grant to the Federal Reserve.  Accounting, income taxes, lending... all of that all protects fraudulent Federal Reserve Notes.

So, here's a question for my readers to ponder.  If monopoly grants are bad, and if copyrights and patents are bad, how will we change that over time?  Big question.  Hard question.  Please think about this, and get back to me in the next day or so with your thoughts, and I'll try to share.  Email me target="_blank" at

You can follow me on facebook.  target="_blank"


<< Previous article
Rate : Average note :5 (1 vote)
>> Next article
Jason Hommel of has written over 100 articles on why people should buy gold, and especially silver bullion and silver stocks. His free silver stock report covers more companies than any other. Jason received a B.A. in Psychology from the University of Colorado at Boulder. An adept biblical scholar, he has also written 100's of articles on theology. Aged 34, he lives in Penn Valley, CA. In response to requests for stock tips, Jason, while not giving out investment advice, offers a "look at his portfolio", which shows his top investments by rank, updated monthly.
WebsiteSubscribe to his services
Latest topics on forum :
Comments closed
Latest comment posted for this article
Be the first to comment
Add your comment
Top articles
World PM Newsflow