- By: Ramsay Woodcock (What Am I Missing?)
New regulations have been proposed that would read New York’s law against price gouging as recommending less strict enforcement against small firms than against larger firms. I’ve argued that this confuses scarcity with monopoly.
Price gouging is the exploitation of natural scarcity to charge higher prices. Monopoly is the creation of artificial scarcity, allowing for higher prices to be charged. Big firms have the power to create artificial scarcity. But all firms can take advantage of natural scarcity to rip the public off. So there’s no good reason to apply a more lenient price gouging standard to small firms.
It turns out that New York Attorney General Letitia James is not the first person to get the distinction between natural and artificial scarcity wrong.
Hapsburg Austria did too.
Featured News
Motorola Accuses UK of Antitrust Breach Over Terminated Emergency Services Contract
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Amazon Must Face Antitrust Case Over Alleged Monopoly Practices
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
US Appeals Court Blocks FCC’s Move to Reinstate Net Neutrality Rules
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Nvidia’s $700 Million Buyout of Run:ai Gets EU Approval, Deal Finalized
Jan 1, 2025 by
CPI
Taiwan FTC Halts Uber’s $950M Foodpanda Buyout Over Antitrust Fears
Jan 1, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand