34. Perfect Competition
Perfect competition
is the perverse theory modern economics has developed in dealing with firms,
prices and resource allocation.
Competition is normally, and correctly, understood to mean rivalry
between firms in attracting consumer patronage. The theory of perfect competition reflects the influence
that positivism and mathematics have had on economics.
In perfect
competition, all firms produce the same identical goods, charge the same price
for those goods, face a perfectly horizontal demand curve, experience no
transaction costs, and buyers and sellers have perfect knowledge. Aside from the appalling lack of
reality embodied in this theory--which should alone warrant its discard--the
theory is also self-contradictory.
A perfectly horizontal demand curve is self-contradictory on the very
grounds of its propositions. A
perfectly horizontal demand curve depicts ongoing sales at the same price,
however to supply that increasing number of sales is to add to total supply,
and an increase in total supply depresses prices! A perfectly elastic demand curve is therefore a theoretical
impossibility.
Additionally, the
theory of perfect competition is said to maximize consumer welfare as the
marginal cost of production will equate exactly with the value the consumer
places on that production as revealed by price. But in its quest to find competition in the large number of
firms the consumer welfare-enhancing economies of large scale production are
lost. Not many consumers will be
delighted to know that the firm's marginal cost is equal to the price paid when
that price is high due to the small scale production necessary to meet the
conditions of perfect competition.
An example: Millions of auto producers might each
produce ten cars per year at a marginal cost of $200,000. But with economies of large scale
production forty auto companies may each produce 250,000 cars per year at a
marginal cost of $15,000 while charging more than its marginal cost, say
$20,000. It is undeniable that a
consumer is better off buying the auto for the $20,000 than for the
$200,000. As far as the consumer
is concerned equating marginal costs and price is totally irrelevant; only
economists pursuing mathematical tangents instead of human action would come to
any other conclusion.
Given the assumption
of perfect knowledge those looking at the world through "perfect
competition colored glasses" have naturally condemned advertising--this
condemnation is yet another perversity resulting from this theory.
Not only is perfect
competition unrealistic but it is also undesirable since only an extremely
limited variety of goods could even conceivably be produced under such
conditions! Are there any other
aspects of human life where one would set as a standard both an unrealistic and
undesirable state of affairs?
-
Armentano, D. T.
Antitrust and Monopoly: Anatomy of a Policy Failure,
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1982) pp. 37 - 39, 256 - 257, 262.
-
Hayek, F. A.
Individualism and Economic Order,
(Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1972) pp. 92 - 106.
-
Kirzner, Israel
"Equilibrium versus the Market Process" in The Foundations of Modern Austrian Economics edited by Edwin G. Dolan,
(Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McNeel, 1976) pp. 115 - 125.
-
Littlechild, S. C.
The Fallacy of the Mixed Economy,
(London: The Institute of Economic Affairs, 1978) pp. 27 - 30.
-
Rothbard, Murray N.
Man, Economy, and State,
(Los Angeles: Nash Publishing, 1962) pp. 633 - 634.
-
Skousen, Mark
Economics on Trial,
(Homewood, Illinois: Business One Irwin, 1991) pp. 238 - 253.
|