# What do libertarians think of "Too Big to Fail"?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-of-too-big-to-fail/650483>\
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion\
**Created:** [February 16, 2013, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-of-too-big-to-fail/650483 "2013-02-16T08:16:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\
**Post date:** [February 22, 2013, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-of-too-big-to-fail/650483/41 "2013-02-22T01:05:25Z")

</div>

> [@emacknight](#):
>
> It’s only logical if you exclude any possible alternative to the widget you produce. Historically when what you describe happens, by the time your company has a monopoly the world changed and no one wants a widget any more, then your monopoly is kind of pointless.
> 
> Which I guess raises a second question: does it matter if you have a monopoly on something no one wants? I’m sure there are millions of those out there.

Because in many cases there might not be innovation, like in cornering the market on a raw material. And monopolies reduce innovation. Remember, Microsoft’s decline is not due to innovation on the desktop or laptop which they block, but because of a totally new platform. We might have a much better desktop/laptop platform today without them, and a thriving market. Who knows? In the long run we are all obsolete is not a good reason to permit monopolies.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![newcomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e5b9ba/32.png) [@newcomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newcomer)\
**Post date:** [February 22, 2013, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-of-too-big-to-fail/650483/42 "2013-02-22T03:58:13Z")

</div>

> [@msmith537](#):
>
> The Lehman Repo 105 accounting discrepencies didn’t come to light until 2010.

You did not need Lehman books in 2010 to know how deep in debt they were in 2008 because their counterparties booked it right.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\
**Post date:** [February 22, 2013, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-of-too-big-to-fail/650483/43 "2013-02-22T12:30:01Z")

</div>

> [@emacknight](#):
>
> It’s only logical if you exclude any possible alternative to the widget you produce. Historically when what you describe happens, by the time your company has a monopoly the world changed and no one wants a widget any more, then your monopoly is kind of pointless.

As has been pointed out, “Widget” could mean anything, including natural resources.

I’d also like to point out that your “historical” solution to the problem of monopolies has absolutely nothing to do with the actual production of widgets, so using it as a solution is merely hoping something will come along which makes widgets obsolete. And in the meantime, _nobody else can compete with the widget manufacturer._

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-of-too-big-to-fail/650483.md?page=2)