Zephyr Teachout Quotes

In an effort to eliminate the possibility of any rival growing up, some monopolists would sacrifice democracy itself.

I think it would be absolutely reckless and irresponsible for anyone to try and break up Microsoft.

Google has established a pattern of lobbying and threatening to acquire power. It has reached a dangerous point common to many monarchs: The moment where it no longer wants to allow dissent.

Consolidating to the point of monopoly has never served the consumer - ever.

I'm not one of those people who hates Amazon because they're big. Why pay a third more for the same thing?

Today, we have our own concentrations of economic power. Instead of Standard Oil, U.S. Steel, the Union Pacific Railroad, and J. P. Morgan and Company, we have Amazon, Google, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft.

Changing technologies, changing marketplaces, and even changing trends in anti-competitive practices have all presented challenges to antitrust enforcement.

Intel continues... to abuse their monopoly, and that's why, around the world, governments and regulatory agencies continue to go after them.

The fact is... our doors have not exactly been knocked down by companies willing to defend Microsoft's business practices.

Only a monopolist could study a business and ruin it by giving away products.

I thought Microsoft did a lot of things that were good and right building parts of the browser into the operating system. Then I thought it out and came up with reasons why it was a monopoly.

They will stop at nothing to enrich the power of Corporations

Private enterprise is ceasing to be free enterprise. Private enterprise indeed became too private. It became privileged enterprise, not free enterprise

The power of groups of men organized by incorporation ... or of small knots of rich men acting in combination has developed with unexpected strength in unexpected ways, overshadowing individuals and even communities, and showing that the very freedom of association which men sought to secure by law when they were threatened by the violence of the potentates may, under the shelter of law, ripen into a new form of tyranny.

The trusts and combinations—the communism of self—whose machinations have prevented us from reaching the success we deserved, should not be forgotten or forgiven.

… a union of power in the same hands over industry, commerce and finance, with a resulting power over public affairs.

The Union Pacific Railroad is … a mendacious monopoly.

The most frequent request we get at the FCC is from companies who say, “Please regulate my rival.” The Commission can become a new tool for competitive strategy.

The Republican Party is the open and avowed handmaiden of the trusts.

… businessmen must compete, but no one may win the competition. It is this aspect of antitrust which creates two standards, one for big business, another for small business. No matter how vicious the competition of the little fellow, the big fellow must not countercompete too hard.

Big oil, big steel, big agriculture avoid the open marketplace. Big corporations fix prices among themselves and thus drive out of business the small entrepreneur. Also, in their conglomerate form, the huge corporations have begun to challenge the very legitimacy of the state.

… the rules of big business … have superseded the teachings of our parents and are reducible to a simple maxim: Get a monopoly; let Society work for you: and remember that the best of all business is politics, for a legislative grant, franchise, subsidy or tax exemption is worth more than a Kimberly or Comstock lode, since it does not require any labor, either mental or physical, for its exploitation”

Hirelings of monopoly

In Europe, we don't only take offence when one company is treating another company in a way that's illegal. We also look at if governments are joining up with companies that makes it more difficult for other companies. We also see that sometimes government actions can make it very difficult for businesses to compete on their merits.

Google's competitors fail to demonstrate that Google's actions stifle competition rather than reflect pro-consumer innovations.