Mario Monti Quotes

The standard formulation on remedy is that it ought to cure past violations and prevent their recurrence. That's what antitrust is all about.

In Europe, we have three tools when it comes to fair competition. One is antitrust, one is merger control, and the third is state aid control. And the third you don't have in the States.

We need to pressure lawmakers to hold hearings on pending mergers, and pressure federal and state enforcers to use their full powers.

I have a very strong tool in competitional enforcement: To do merger control, to look into cartels, misuse of dominant position - when member states hand out favors, for instance, in terms of tax breaks. But even though that's a strong tool, it cannot solve everything.

As attorney general, I would work with my colleagues in other states to launch a major antitrust investigation to look into the ways in which Facebook and Google are wielding and may be abusing their duopoly powers.

Like other antitrust agencies we make our assessment of a merger or antitrust case based on its impact on our jurisdiction, and not on the nationality of the companies. This is exactly what the U.S. antitrust agencies, the Justice Department and the FTC, do.

The one thing that I know government is good for is countervailing against monopoly. It's not great at that either, but it's the only force I know that is fairly reliable.

Vigilant and effective antitrust enforcement today is preferable to the heavy hand of government regulation of the Internet tomorrow.

As someone with a deep faith in competition and the market, I also know that markets only work with tough enforcement of the rules that guarantee competition and fair play - and that the pressure to break those rules only gets stronger as the amount of money involved gets larger.

I talked about the barriers created by monopolies. I said that it was the role of government to break up these monopolies and that we couldn't do it alone.

The only way you can stop the unregulated monopoly ... from gouging ... is to introduce competition.

Effective competition requires that traders have large freedom of action when conducting their own affairs.

The Sherman Act was designed to be a comprehensive charter of economic liberty aimed at preserving free and unfettered competition as the rule of trade. It rests on the premise that the unrestrained interaction of competitive forces will yield the best allocation of our economic resources, the lowest prices, the highest quality and the greatest material progress, while at the same time providing an environment conducive to the preservation of our democratic political and social institutions.

The first is determining how to deal with the great industrial combinations is knowledge of the facts—publicity.

The Federal Trade Commission is not an enforcement agency.

Consumers depend on us to make sure that competition is fair and open, and it's my responsibility to make that happen.

It's not in my mission to work against Euroskepticism; it's my mission to work for fair markets. In antitrust, what is at stake is, in some ways, as old as Adam and Eve because it is about greed, to get more.

The law does not allow the FTC to just snap its fingers and temporarily block a merger.

I'm for strong antitrust enforcement.

Before the monopoly should be permitted, there must be reason to believe it will do some good - for society, and not just for monopoly holders.

Amazon is not a monopoly or a monopsony, and even if it were, that by itself isn't illegal.

Antitrust law isn't about protecting competing businesses from each other, it's about protecting competition itself on behalf of the public.

The Sherman Act is similar in the economics sphere to the Bill of Rights in the personal sphere.

I've never been antiregulation. I've always believed that raw, unregulated capitalism doesn't work.

I can't deny that some customers and prospects think it's the key to our future. But it's not. We're certainly supportive of the Dept. of Justice and the 20 states that have brought this action.