The whole theory that monopolies need to be broken up is that once you have a monopoly, you jack up the prices and gouge the consumers.

But facebook doesn't even charge its users, they're offering their services for free and and by definition can't be jacking up their prices.

And if you say that facebooks customers are advertisers, then you're saying that they have a monopoly on the advertising industry. Not only does Facebook not have a monopoly on the advertising industry, but it doesn't even have a monopoly on the advertising industry on the internet.

There has never been a time where there's more options than now for advertisers to choose from.

The whole theory that monopolies need to be broken up is that once you have a monopoly, you jack up the prices and gouge the consumers.

But facebook doesn't even charge its users, they're offering their services for free and and by definition can't be jacking up their prices.

And if you say that facebooks customers are advertisers, then you're saying that they have a monopoly on the advertising industry. Not only does Facebook not have a monopoly on the advertising industry, but it doesn't even have a monopoly on the advertising industry on the internet.

There has never been a time where there's more options than now for advertisers to choose from.

Governments have a monopoly on the most important thing of all, power and force, where they can enforce their monopolies at the point of a gun.

The whole point of attacking monopolies is to vilify capitalism and hold the government out as the saviour to protect us, when the government itself is the biggest and strongest monopoly of all.

Governments have a monopoly on the most important thing of all, power and force, where they can enforce their monopolies at the point of a gun.

The whole point of attacking monopolies is to vilify capitalism and hold the government out as the saviour to protect us, when the government itself is the biggest and strongest monopoly of all.

One of the big government regulations that became part of the Sherman Act was that companies couldn't work together to fix prices because that would result in customers being forced to pay fixed prices set by companies. They're forced to compete with each other in order to drive prices down for consumers, which is a good thing.

But what we don't realise is that this is the same thing that labour unions do. Workers come together to fix their prices, which is wages, resulting in companies being forced to pay fixed prices.

In the same way that if employees competed against each other like companies had to, the wages paid would become lower and more competitive.

This was made possible as part of the Clayton act comes in, which exempts labour unions from the rules set by the Sherman Act.

The issue with all of this is that it is often consumers that end up paying for these increases wage prices, as the businesses pass the costs onto customers.

One of the big government regulations that became part of the Sherman Act was that companies couldn't work together to fix prices because that would result in customers being forced to pay fixed prices set by companies. They're forced to compete with each other in order to drive prices down for consumers, which is a good thing.

But what we don't realise is that this is the same thing that labour unions do. Workers come together to fix their prices, which is wages, resulting in companies being forced to pay fixed prices.

In the same way that if employees competed against each other like companies had to, the wages paid would become lower and more competitive.

This was made possible as part of the Clayton act comes in, which exempts labour unions from the rules set by the Sherman Act.

The issue with all of this is that it is often consumers that end up paying for these increases wage prices, as the businesses pass the costs onto customers.

The two big problems with government unions is that the government doesn't have competition, and that there's a significant conflict of interest between unions and the government.

As governments are monopolies without competition, when unions make the costs of providing government services more expensive, governments usually pass this onto taxpayers to cover these costs. And taxpayers don't have any other alternative to go for those government services.

Secondly, in the private sector, the union and the business itself have opposing interests, where the union is trying to increase their wages whilst the business is trying to minimize their costs, resulting in natural negotiations. In government unions, not only are salaries paid by taxpayers money so the government officials care less, but all the employees inside of government unions themselves are voters which the government officials want on their side, resulting in many government officials granting the unions request so they have them on their side when it comes to voting.

The two big problems with government unions is that the government doesn't have competition, and that there's a significant conflict of interest between unions and the government.

As governments are monopolies without competition, when unions make the costs of providing government services more expensive, governments usually pass this onto taxpayers to cover these costs. And taxpayers don't have any other alternative to go for those government services.

Secondly, in the private sector, the union and the business itself have opposing interests, where the union is trying to increase their wages whilst the business is trying to minimize their costs, resulting in natural negotiations. In government unions, not only are salaries paid by taxpayers money so the government officials care less, but all the employees inside of government unions themselves are voters which the government officials want on their side, resulting in many government officials granting the unions request so they have them on their side when it comes to voting.