The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-02-23

enterprises there goes a reduction IN
the cost Of extraction, manufacture,
and distribution, and that such re-
| duction in cost lis accomplished oy
Hover prices to the and does
not involve a reduction in wages or
an impairment of the conditions Of
labor.
even IL these claims were true the
Iouestion would still remain, of course,
whether the evil resulting from large
combinations would not be greater
han the alleged advantages Of cheap
err production and distribution. 1t IS
c%ontended, on the other hand, that
| the source and origin OF monopoly
is found chiefly in the desire to exploit
the general public by stock-jobbing
| schemes for the immediate prohr OF
the promoters, or for the purpose o.
| obtaining control of the market ana
exacting unduly high prices from the
consumer. -.
MANY large combinations have fall
ed and demonstrated their onom
inefficiency. Combinations which nave
| obtained control of the market and 1t
la admitted, have prospered, U TINS
is alleged to be due to their monopo-
listic position, and not to superior EN-
cheney. According to those VINO hold
this view, there is a point peyonu
which the increase in size OF opera
tions does not result in an increase
in and efficiency, but rather
In loss and waste. so that the maxi
mum efficiency is not attained by large
combinations, but instead by concerns
of moderate size. II this latter CON-
tention be true, then, as has been saiu,
the monopolistic system contains in
itself the seeds Of it's OWN decay,
Again, some. of those who dispute
the superior efficiency of large com
binations contend that this claim is
made entirely as a blind for the pur-
nose of selling watered stock. They
saw that such organizations are estab-
lished for the purpose either Of get
ting control of the market and exact
ing excessive prices from consumers.
or of issuing large amounts of water
ed stock for the purpose of selling such
stock to the public, In the first case,
1t is argued such combinations are
not concerned with the promotion of
greater efficiency but merely with OBJ
tanning a monopoly; in the second
| case they are chiefly concerned with
! selling the stock, and as they can not
claim to the general public that it has
a. great value due to monopoly, they
are obliged to find another selling
argument, namely, superior efficiency,
"Of almost equal Importance with
| the determination of this question of
comparative efficiency is that of the
price policy of such large industrial
combinations as have achieved a sub
stantial control of the market. Those
who allege that such industrial enter
| prises result In greater economy and
efficiency in production often overlook
the. equally important question
| whether or not they absorb all the
! haoadts of s,,nh economies in jOPraaE-
! ed profits without 'eopeeding any share
| thereof to labor in higher wages, or to
| consumers in relatively lower prices
or improved quality of goods, etc. The
| determination of the facts in respect
to this question also might not be
such as to establish broad generaiiza-
| tions or conclusions, bW the import
ance of having the facts is none the
less obvious" "''