评论
打印
Welcome to Crash Course Economic my name is Jacob Clifford.
欢迎收看经济速成班，我是雅各布·克利福德。
And I'm Adriene Hill. Today we're going to talk about monopolies!
我是埃德因·希尔。我们今天要讲垄断！
Which are terrible, illegal, and only serve to exploit helpless consumers,
垄断可怕且非法，而且只用于剥削无助的消费者，
except when they're delivering essential services that competitive free markets kind of fail to deliver.
除非后者提供的必要服务是竞争激烈的自由市场提供不了的。
So, are monopolies good? Or bad? Or...Both.
所以垄断是好还是坏？或者两者兼而有之。
When some people hear the word "capitalist" they picture the robber barons of the 19th century.
当人们听到“资本家”这个词时，通常会想到19世纪的强盗大亨。
Cutthroat monopolists, like Andrew Carnegie, JP Morgan, and John D. Rockefeller.
他们是残酷的垄断者，安德鲁·卡内基、摩根大通、约翰·D·洛克菲勒等都是这类人。
They dominated industries like oil, railroads, banking, and steel and would do anything to crush their competitors.
他们占据了石油、铁路、银行和钢铁等行业，并竭尽全力打压竞争对手。
After all, in Rockefeller's words "The growth of a large business is merely a survival of the fittest."
毕竟，用洛克菲勒的话说就是，“大型企业的成长仅仅是适者生存。”
Now, it's true that market economists love competition, but monopolies are the antithesis of competition.
诚然，市场经济学家喜欢竞争，但垄断是竞争的对立面。
In most cases, economists want to prevent monopolies, not celebrate them.
在大多数情况下，经济学家希望防止垄断，而不是赞美它们。
Let's go to the Thought Bubble.
我们去看“Thought Bubble”。
A pure monopoly is a market controlled by one seller with a good or service that that has no close substitutes.
纯粹垄断是指一个卖方用一种商品或服务控制市场，并且它们没有近似替代品。
But the true power of a monopoly comes from its ability to keep competitors out of the market.
但垄断的真正力量来源于将竞争者排挤出市场的能力。
Monopolies are able to erect obstacles that economists call barriers to entry.
垄断企业能够设置障碍，经济学家称之为进入壁垒。
If a company starts offering a brand new product in a market with low barriers,
如果一家公司开始在低门槛的市场上推出一种全新产品，
they won't maintain the market power for very long.
那么它们不会长期保持市场权势 。
Take gourmet food trucks.
以食品卡车为例。
In the last decade, gourmet cooks started moving to the street food business,
过去十年间，美食家们开始转向街头食品生意，
competing in a market historically associated with lower-quality options like hot dog vendors.
在过去与低质量选择(如热狗供应商)相关的市场展开竞争。
These food truck were a hit.
这些食品卡车轰动一时。
Demand was high and the barriers to entry were relatively low, so more and more competitors jumped in.
由于需求高和进入门槛相对较低，越来越多的竞争者们开始涌入该市场。
Now food truck are kind of everywhere.
现在食品卡车到处都是。
And that's exactly how capitalism is supposed to work.
这就是资本主义本来的运作方式。
People wanted more street food options and profit-seeking entrepreneurs gave them what they wanted.
人们想要更多的街头食品选择，逐利的企业家给了他们想要的东西。
Incentives and competition made society better off.
激励和竞争让社会变得更好了。
But imagine a city where there are a limited number of licenses for food trucks,
但想象一下，一个城市的食品卡车牌照数量有限，
and I own all of them for my fleet of artisanal macaroni and cheese trucks.
而我的手工通心粉和奶酪车拥有所有牌照。
I also know the mayor, since he's a big fan of artisanal macaroni and cheese.
并且我了解市长，他是手工通心粉和奶酪的忠实粉丝。
If I can convince the mayor to ban traditional push cart food vendors,
如果我能说服市长取缔传统的推车小贩，
with their shwarma and their bacon-wrapped hot dogs, I'll have a monopoly on street food.
取缔他们的沙威玛和培根热狗，那么我将垄断街头食品。
I'm not increasing profit by producing more stuff.
我不是通过生产更多的产品来增加利润。
I've influenced government regulations in such a way
我影响了政府的规章制度，这样的话，
that anyone who's hungry, but doesn't want to enter a building, has to buy food from me.
饥饿但不想去餐馆的人们就得从我这儿买食物。
This is sometimes called crony capitalism,
这有时被称为裙带资本主义，
and it's a big reason many economists call for government transparency and accountability.
是许多经济学家呼吁政府透明和问责制的一个重要原因。
Thanks Thought Bubble.
感谢“Thought Bubble”。
Companies don't have to have a literal monopoly to exercise monopoly power.
公司行使垄断权力不必体现在字面上。
When a single company has a huge market share in its industry,
当一家公司在其所属行业拥有很大的市场份额时，
like Google does in search, they wield a lot of the same power that a pure monopoly would.
比如谷歌在搜索引擎中的分量，他也拥有与纯粹垄断一样强大的力量。
Now, when few firms have a large majority of market share, it's called an oligopoly.
几家公司拥有绝大多数市场份额的情况被称为寡头垄断。
The market for mobile device operating systems is a good example with Google's Android and Apple's iOS.
移动设备操作系统市场中，谷歌的安卓和苹果的iOS就是很好的例子。
The point is that one company doesn't need to have 100% market shares to operate like a monopoly.
关键是，一家公司不需要像垄断那样拥有100%的市场份额。
In the example of the anti-food-truck ordinance, the barriers to entry was government regulation,
在《反食品卡车条例》的例子中，企业进入市场的障碍是政府管制，
but what some other ways companies maintain large market shares?
但公司还有哪些其他方式保持其巨大的市场份额呢？
Well, there's also control of resources,
控制资源，
like DeBeers once had 90% of market share in diamonds because they controlled the world's diamond mines.
例如，德比尔斯曾经拥有90%的钻石市场份额，因为它们控制着世界上的钻石矿。
Another barrier is high start-up costs.
另一个障碍是高额的启动成本
You might want to build a nuclear power plant to compete with your local power company
你可能想要建造一座核电站来与当地的电力公司竞争，
but you need a whole lot of money to get in the game.
但是你需要一大笔钱才能进入游戏。
Monopolies can restrict output and charge higher prices without worrying about competitors.
垄断可以限制产量，并在不担心竞争对手的情况下提高价格。
This is why most economists support anti-trust laws that promote competition and outlaw anti-competitive tactics.
这就是为什么大多数经济学家支持反托拉斯法，后者促进竞争、取缔反竞争策略。
They're called anti-trust laws because monopolies use to be called "trusts."
它们被称为反托拉斯法是因为垄断被称为“托拉斯”。
In 1890, the U.S. passed the Sherman Act, named for Senator John Sherman.
1890年，美国通过了以参议员约翰·谢尔曼的名字命名的《谢尔曼法》。
Sherman argued, "If we will not endure a king as a political power
谢尔曼认为，“如果我们不能容忍一个国王作为政治权力中心，
we should not endure a king over the production, transportation, and sale of any of the necessaries of life."
那么我们也不应该忍受控制生产、运输和任何生活必需品销售的国王。”
The Sherman Act outlaws any monopolization or attempted monopolization.
《谢尔曼法》禁止任何垄断或企图垄断。
Court rulings and later laws gave the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission greater authority to prevent monopolies.
法院裁决和之后的法律赋予司法部和联邦贸易委员会更大的权力来防止垄断。
If the Coca Cola company wanted to purchase PepsiCo, it's be a tough regulatory sell.
如果可口可乐公司想收购百事可乐，它将很难通过监管。
In the U.S. mergers and acquisitions need to be approved by the government agencies.
在美国，并购需要得到政府机构的批准。
Economists call the act of buying companies that produce similar products horizontal integration.
经济学家将收购生产类似产品的公司的行为称为横向合并。
Like, AT&T tried to buy T-Mobile, but failed
比如，AT&T试图收购T-Mobile，但失败了，
because regulators believed the new company would control too big a share of the wireless communications market.
因为监管机构认为，新公司将控制无线通信市场过大的份额。
Vertical integration, on the other hand, is when a company directly owns or controls its supply chain.
另一方面，纵向合并是指公司直接拥有或控制其供应链。
For example, in the 1920s, the Ford Motor Company owned much of the entire supply chain needed to make cars.
例如，在20世纪20年代，福特汽车公司拥有制造汽车所需的整个供应链。
It owned iron and coal mines, and made its own steel, glass, tires,
它拥有铁矿和煤矿，并自己制造钢铁、玻璃和轮胎，
and even paper in the massive River Rouge factory complex in Michigan.
甚至在密歇根的大胭脂河工厂里生产纸张。
Vertical integration is complicated, and it's not always illegal.
纵向合并很复杂，而且并不总是非法的。
When a company just expands its business to in-source part of its supply chain,
当一家公司仅仅将业务扩展到其供应链的内部时，
that's usually not subject to anti-trust regulation.
通常不受反垄断监管的影响。
Companies can run into some trouble when they try to vertically integrate via mergers.
企业试图通过合并进行纵向合并时，可能会遇到一些麻烦。
Anti-trust regulations can also prevent companies from making anti-competitive deals with their suppliers.
反托拉斯法也可以防止公司与其供应商进行反竞争的交易。
In the late 1990s, Microsoft was accused of pressuring PC manufacturers
上世纪90年代末，微软被指控向个人电脑制造商施压，
to pre-install Microsoft's web browser, Internet Explorer, and exclude their main browser competitor, Netscape.
要求其预装微软的网页浏览器Internet Explorer，并拒绝其主要浏览器竞争对手Netscape。
Regulators busted them, and almost busted up the company.
监管机构破坏了施压行为，几乎使微软公司破产。
Even Toys-R-Us! It's gotten into trouble for conspiring with toy supplier, like Hasbro and Mattel,
甚至玩具反斗城也遭遇过类似情况！它因为与孩之宝公司和美泰公司等玩具供应商合谋，
to stop manufacturers from selling certain toys to other stores.
阻止制造商向其他商店出售某些玩具而陷入麻烦。
So monopolies and monopolistic behaviour are bad, right?
所以垄断和垄断行为是不好的，对吧？
Well, it turns out that sometimes they're useful.
事实证明，它们有时是有用的。
Look at patents. A patent grants an inventor exclusive right to profit from a specific product or process.
以专利为例。专利权授予发明者从特定产品或过程中获取利润的专有权。
In the U.S., it is actually written into the Constitution.
它实际上被写入了美国宪法。
Patents and other intellectual property rights encourage innovation.
专利和其他知识产权鼓励创新。
Pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars each year developing drugs,
制药公司每年花费数十亿美元开发药物，
and patents allow them to recover those research and development costs and, ideally, earn profit.
专利使他们能够收回研发成本，并在理想情况下盈利。
A patent essentially guarantees their right to be a monopoly, but not forever.
专利本质上保证了他们作为垄断者的权利，但不是永久的。
After a certain amount of time, usually about 20 years, a patent expires, which lowers the barriers to entry.
经过一定的时间，通常是20年左右，专利就会到期，这降低了进入门槛。
Competition moves in, prices fall, and companies look for something new to patent.
竞争进入，价格下降，公司开始寻找新的专利。
Intellectual property law and patents are really complex.
知识产权法和专利真的很复杂。
And Stan, he's actually done a whole series about them.
斯坦做了一系列专利产品。
Natural monopolies are special situations
自然垄断是特殊情况，
where it is more cost effective to have one large producer rather than several smaller competing firms.
在此情况下，一家大型公司比几家小型竞争公司成本效率更高。
The best examples are public utilities in markets such as electricity, water, natural gas, and sewage.
它的最好例子是市场中电力、水、天然气和污水等公用事业。
They may be privately owned or publicly owned but either way,
它们可能私有或公有，但不管怎样，
they remain a monopoly because the government limits competition.
由于政府限制竞争，它们都是垄断企业。
I mean, if there were three competing electric power companies in one city,
我的意思是，如果一个城市有三家相互竞争的电力公司，
that would mean building three different power plant, and running three sets of power lines through the streets.
这意味着要建造三种不同的发电厂，并在街道上运行三组电线。
The result would be higher in costs.
其结果将是成本增多。
So, in this case, it would be cheaper to have one electric company because they have economies of scale.
所以在这种情况下，拥有一家电力公司更便宜，因为它们有规模经济。
The monopoly can still raise prices and abuse its power, so the government often regulates prices and fees.
垄断可以导致价格提高、权力滥用，因此政府经常调控价格和费用。
Now, of course there are debated over when the government should interfere and which markets justify natural monopolies.
当然，人们还在争论政府应该什么时候干预，以及哪些市场可以证明自然垄断的正当性。
Nike has about 90% market share in basketball shoes, but it's not a natural monopoly.
耐克在篮球鞋市场占有90%的份额，但它并不是自然垄断。
It's a non-coercive monopoly.
它是非强制性垄断。
There are plenty of other shoe companies and people aren't forced to buy Nike shoes.
世界上还有很多其他鞋业公司，而且人们并没有被强迫买耐克鞋。
So there's no reason for the government to get involved. But that's not always the case.
所以政府没有理由介入。但情况并非总是如此。
Up to the 1970s AT&T was given natural monopoly status,
上世纪70年代，AT&T公司确立了自然垄断地位，
which gave it nearly complete control of the telephone industry.
它几乎完全控制了电话行业。
In 1974 an anti-trust lawsuit was filed by the Department of Justice,
1974年，美国司法部提出了一项反托拉斯诉讼，
and the end result was the largest corporate breakup in American history.
结果导致美国历史上最大的公司解体。
AT&T dissolved into seven regional telephone companies,
AT&T公司解散成7家地区性电话公司，
other companies like Sprint and MCI quickly jumped into the market.
斯普林特和MCI等其他公司很快进入了市场。
This process is called deregulation, it's happened in many markets from delivering mail to airlines.
这一过程被称为去监管化，从邮递到航空行业的许多市场都发生过。
So let's step back here. Why are we so worried about monopolies?
所以，我们在这儿停一下。我们为什么这么担心垄断呢？
Well, a lot of this has to do with pricing.
这和定价有很大关系。
For one, monopolies can charge more for their products than they could if the market was competitive.
首先，垄断者对他们产品收取的费用比市场竞争激烈时的价格高。
They can also engage in a practice called price discrimination.
他们也可以采取所谓的价格歧视。
Price discrimination is the practice of charging different consumers different prices for exactly the same product.
价格歧视是指在同一产品上对不同的消费者收费不同的做法。
In fact the earliest regulations on railroads came about because they were engaged in price discrimination.
事实上，铁路的最早规定是由于它们采取了价格歧视。
they charged different rates to haul freight.
它们对运输的货物收取不同的运费。
This gave an advantage to companies that shipped more freight
这为那些运货更多的公司带来了优势，
and helped to force smaller producers out of business,
并迫使小型企业破产。
creating even more monopoly power in the economy.
在经济中创造了更多的垄断力量。
But price discrimination isn't just for monopolies, and it's not always illegal.
但是价格歧视不是垄断独有的，而且并不总是非法的。
To pull off price discrimination, a business needs to be able to segregate the market based on consumers' willingness to pay.
为了消除价格歧视，企业需要根据消费者的支付意愿来隔离市场。
The airline industry does this using time, charging those that book early less than those that book late.
航空公司会利用时间这样做，对预定较早的人少收一点儿费用。
A price-sensitive student might be only be able to pay 200 dollars so she books a seat weeks or month in advance.
对价格敏感的学生可能只能支付200美元，所以她可以提前几周或一个月预订座位。
A time-sensitive businesswomen that need to be at a board meeting tomorrow,
对时间敏感的商人需要参加明天的董事会会议，
might be willing to pay 800 dollars for that same type of seat on the same flight.
她可能愿意为同一航班上同一类型的座位支付800美元。
The point is charging a single price wouldn't generate as much profit as charging different prices.
重点是，收取单一价格不会产生和收取不同价格一样多的利润。
Price discrimination happens more often than you think.
价格歧视的现象比你以为得多很多。
Discounts based on age or occupation are good examples.
以年龄或职业为基础的折扣就是很好的例子。
Price discrimination works best when firms have a large share of market power.
当公司拥有很大的市场份额时，价格歧视效果最好。
If there were hundreds of airlines it is unlikely that any one of them could price discriminate without losing customers.
如果有数百家航空公司，它们中的任何一家都不可能在不失去客户的情况下对其采取价格歧视。
Like a lot of things we look at here at Crash Course, monopolies and pricing are complicated.
就像我们在速成课上看到的很多事物一样，垄断和定价是复杂的。
Generally, competition is a good thing, Except when it isn't.
一般来说，竞争是件好事，但某些情况下不是。
Thanks for watching. We'll see you next week.
感谢您的收看，我们下期见。
Crash Course Economics is made with the help of all these fine people.
它是由这些好心人帮助制作的。
You can support Crash Course at Patreon.
您可以通过在Patreon上支持速成课程。
Patreon is a voluntary subscription service
Patreon是个自愿订阅服务的平台，
where your donations help keep Crash Course free, for everyone, forever.
你的捐助可以帮助速成班永远免费对所有人开放。
Thanks so much for letting us monopolize your time for the last ten minutes or so.
非常感谢你让我们独占你们之前十分钟左右的时间。
