Quote (RiskOfFire @ Dec 27 2014 03:24pm)
That's a very cute little bullshit story but then there's reality of how free markets work...
Able says he owns the lake, and his private property rights mean Baker and Charlie can't fish there anymore but if they work for Able he'll pay them each half a fish a day so long as they catch him 5 fish a day each. Then Baker and Charlie can rent a shelter from Able for a quarter fish a day, and don't forget the equipment they are using, that belongs to Able to, because of his God-given property rights and all. Baker and Charlie can rent that off of him too for another 1/8 of a fish a day. Don't forget this is all voluntary mutually beneficial exchange because if Able didn't let Baker and Charlie work for him on his divine private property they wouldn't have any fish at all. Able is a saint, a living deity.
The restrictions are the key to your point. In a market economy, there are plenty of ways to get around the pains of monopoly. Fish has too many substitutes for a monopoly to really be harmful.
Additionally, the monopoly pricing still has to cater to market demand. Monopolies are limited in size and scope by economic nature. If a monopoly tries to grow beyond its cost restrictions, it undercuts it's own prices. Awful as monopolies may be, excessive market power doesn't imply complete pricing and selling power.
Also, the limitation on buyers, sellers and barriers to entry exclude this example as on of free markets.