Another example is Bradshaw, of Bradshaw Auto Parts (now BAP-GEON). He didn’t even pay himself enough to buy a brief case – he carried papers in a cardboard box, and built shelves in his office out of planks and 2 X 4s.
Capitalism as such has a tendency to descend into monopoly, or a form of oligarchy–lots of money (which equals political power, like it or not) in very few hands. Just look at the banking industry–mergers, buyouts, and takeovers. Take a look at Wal-Mart, the only company I know that can easily swallow up the local grocer, pharmacist, and garden nursery in one fell swoop. More and more money is going into fewer and fewer hands. Doesn’t that make anyone else nervous?
Sorry…a little Oingo Boing nostalgia that will probably be lost on 95% of the forum participants. I promise not to do it again…unless I have to. Not that any CEO needs to live like a pauper…lol, but wow, these are stories of humble CEO’s in my book. Nice to hear! Thanks for sharing!
I rose from salesman to sales manager to purchasing manager to vice president to president. Along the way the company grew to nearly $150 million in annual sales before I left. During my tenure I helped engineer an employee buy-out of the company (E.S.O.P.). When we had a bad year I was the first to take a pay cut, in fact I would often over rule others in management and prevent them from suffering a pay cut even if they volunteered one. When I announced my retirement I agreed to a stock price limit on the stock I had accumulated, if the value of the stock exceeded a set level then I would split the excess proceeds with the employees. The value of the proceeds was DOUBLE the estimates of an independent fiduciary. There are many things that can be accomplished by a motivated workforce and dedicated team.
No, capitalism does not have a tendency to descend into monopoly. Nor does it have a tendency to descend into feudalism, communism, or any other system. People have a tendency to abuse power and try to pervert any system. But monopoly is the antithesis of Capitalism.
This is degenerating into another “I hate business and especially Wal-Mart” thread.
Ah, a luddite.
Indeed it is.
That is an amazing story–I appreciate you sharing it. I know there are plenty of good CEO’s out there. I think for some reason, that many associate someone’s net worth with greed and lack of humility. Someone can be wealthy, and still be very philanthropic, etc…God never said we had to live without wealth. It’s love of wealth, that is sinful.
But doesn’t that amount to the same thing?
No, it doesn’t.
If your theory were true, then how do you explain countries that went from capitalism to communism? Or those who went from feudalism to communism?
Virtually all businessmen want competition – monopolies are difficult to maintain and normally collapse of their own weight. They are inherently unstable.
Can you give us the names of these “aggressive businesspeople” and show us where they have said that?
Capitalism does’t permit individuals to “dominate the field” because of its inherent competition. If one person “corners the market” in say, diapers, it won’t be long before other people begin to manufacture substitutes.
You say that, but offer no evidence.
Do you have any data to back up the idea that business people favor competition over monopoly? It would seem to fly in the face of what I see happening in the marketplace. For example, the cable companies in my state are trying to prevent A t and t from entering the cable tv market. Also, the pharmaceutical companies frequently engage in lawsuits to extend the length of their patents, which helps them maintain monopoly power before the drug goes into the public domain.
Do you have any data to back up the idea that they don’t?
Then I suggest you’re turning a blind eye to what’s happening and refusing to see things that don’t agree with your pre-conceptions.
So how do they deal with Direct TV and Dish Network?
Cite?
All I can say is that in my professional experience, all the evidence that I have seen from the actual behavior of people in the economy, is that business people usually tend to try and keep out competition whenever they can. For example, a number of years back the American Medical Association was lobbying to keep Nurse Practitioners out of the marketplace. Or when the government bailed out Chrysler 25 years ago, Ford and GM were against the bailout. Or in the 1960’s when MCI wanted to enter the long distance telephone industry, A T and T lobbied against it.
Competition is great, for the consumer, but firms usually would be better off without competition, because they could then charge higher prices and make higher profits. If Intel had a monopoly on computer chips, we would probably still be using 486’s.
My preconception is simple (although in economics, we would call them assumptions): people in the marketplace, act in their own self interest. If keeping out competition is in a business person’s self interest, they will try to do that. I didn’t say that there wasn’t competition in the marketplace, there is and it is a very good thing. But I have never met anybody who when faced with having more competition or less competition in his business, actually wanted more.
Dish and directtv provide competition which is great for consumers. It means the cable company has competition, but are the cable companies glad that the satellite companies are in business, from the behavior I have seen vis a vis A T and T, I would argue no.So how do they deal with Direct TV and Dish Network?
The following is from a law firm that specializes in helping pharmaceutical firms extend their patents:
Where did I refuse to recognize this? I said nothing about the benefits of competition. Certainly, drug companies spend lots of money on R and D, and they have to because of competition. That is a great benefit, much of which accrues to consumers. Nor did I say that the patent system was wrong. But, when faced with a choice of more competition or less competition, which are businesses going to choose. From the evidence I have seen, they prefer less competition.
Then you haven’t seen much.
Once again, please cite some evidence. I have given several examples of businesses lobbying to keep out competition. You have yet to come up with one example of a business lobbying to get more competition in their own industry.
And by and large, they failed, did they not?
Lobbying to get more competition in their own industry? Lobbying to get more competition in their own industry?
Your claim was that businessmen prefer competition over monopoly. Now if that is true, that means they would want more competitors, if they lobby to keep competitors out, then that would suggest that you are wrong. To prove you are right, you would have to show that businesses lobby to get more competitors in their industry. Which of course, you cannot do.Lobbying to get more competition in their own industry? Lobbying to get more competition in their own industry?
You do have a strange view of economics!
False dichotomy!!
What’s the difference in effect between murder and a natural death?
Some lawyers steal from their clients. Does that mean all lawyers are bad?
What part of “in a competitive environment” did you fail to understand?
Which is outside the economic system. And laws favoring one company over another are done outside the economic system.
