Market Interference is not monopolistic - PART 3 ISOEconomics / Isokratic Econommics
Governments do not have the monopoly in damaging market interferences. The extremist actions of the then unregulated powerful trade unions in the UK, is another form of market interference. The health government was forced to introduce a three day a week. Who paid the price? The ordinary citizens.
The reasons for the abusive interference, can sometimes be a combination of politico economics. Interference in the free markets, influenced by the few. The case that springs to mind here, is that of Tony Blair, where the liberalisation of the used car market, was in effect stopped due to the interference of pressure groups, such as those of the big giant car manufacturers, the likes of Toyota and Nissan and others who threatened to move production to other countries.
As a result, instead of the market being opened to free imports on the used car market, and even on the new cars, a quota was introduced, restricting only to 50 per model, per year, the cars allowed to be imported by individuals outside the factory system, and still full restrictions on the used car importation. Clearly, a case against individual freedom. Clearly a case against competitive markets. Clearly a case of government, politico economic market intervention. Clearly a negative governmental market interference, which results in artificially high prices in the UK car industry.
The victims, as always being the consumer, the public at large. The UK consumer is punished and forced to pay higher prices for identical cars, than the prices paid by their European neighbours, even for cars produced in the UK. Imagine what will have been the decision if the public at large were to have voted on the issue whether to free the market imports or not. An Iso-economic decision in the hands of the public. Could the public have voted against their pockets in this case?