Theodore Roosevelt lead the campaign of breaking up monopolies and trusts.
In the wake of urbanization after the Second World War, many big corporations emerged with a desire to dominate both nationally and internationally markets. The rise of these companies posed threats to consumers who faced a potential monopolization of essential products. In an effort to protect the consumers, the government intervention was critical in amazing sure that these corporations did not end up monopolizing the market. Competition provides better services to consumers because they seek to offer quality and durable products, which will not be the case if one company was responsible for manufacturing. The government’s actions to protect the market take a legal approach by formulating laws and policies that seek to make sure that the limitations are put in place to curb any attempt by the business community who may seek to monopolize specific sectors of the economy. The legal actions in the United States have evolved from independence due to the many attempts by big companies to establish monopolies to exploit their customers. The government effort involved trust-busting where the government lead by the 26th President of United States Theodore Roosevelt lead the campaign of breaking up monopolies and trusts.
The activities of some major companies posed as a threat, and the president had to make some drastic actions when it came to establishing a safer and competitive market in the country. However, he could not ju8st control these corporations because they were owned by wealthy and well-connected individuals in the country. Constructional Rights Foundation (n.d) claims that, “By 1880, Standard Oil owned or controlled 90 percent of the U.S. oil refining business, making it the first great industrial monopoly in the world.” In the early urbanization, large companies such as Rockefeller and Standard Oil were building trust with the sole purpose of dominating the oil industry, and they succeeded for some time. The possibilities of the government not doing anything to stop these exploitative partnerships between large corporations who continuously continued to buy out small companies. The move was to beat the competition, which led to the first law of burst trusting known as the Sherman Anti-Trust Act was the first Federal act which outlawed any form monopolistic practices when it came to businesses. Congress enactment of these laws sought to curb the socio-legal problem of trusts that had become a problem to the country’s econo0my. The monopolization posed a danger to the government because a few individuals were amassing vast health from exploiting the consumers into relying only on their products. Additionally, the attempts by companies to establish monopolies continue to face the government even in the contemporary world.
In recent times there has been an emergence of companies and corporations seeking to establish monopolies in the United States and even in the foreign markets. The only thing that has been limiting total takeover is the state’s laws that ban or outlaws the formation of trusts. This has influenced many companies that have the potential to expand globally to a limitation of an area. However, in retail business today, “a single corporation, Walmart, controls 72 percent of warehouse clubs and supercenters in the entire United States” (Open Markets). The fight for monopolization continues to be an ailing factor in the government effort to curb this social problem. The dominance by big companies such as Walmart breaches the set Acts that seek to regulate monopolization. Bursting trust attempts by the government to curb such corporations such as Walmart have many times proved futile with companies proving that they are not monopolies. However, a significant number of citizens feel the company has monopolized the grocery sector. The increase in the struggle to curb monopolization through burst trust has proven to be a challenge in the contemporary world. The situation exists because organizations have influenced some individuals in the government who have shares in these corporations, thus the failure of Congress to formulate any effective law that can directly address the issue. Moreover, in the early trust bursting, there was resistance from a section of citizens who felt like trust was not America-like and thus should be banned. Munchy (1997) claims that, “In the 1912 presidential election, Gompers supported Woodrow Wilson, who agreed that trusts undermined American manhood” (25-26). According to the author, there was a population that believed that the trust burst was not white manhood. The idea has shifted in the modern world, where the CEO of big corporations claims that they are just expanding just like any business would, and they are doing so due to the customers’ demand for their products.
The Formative era from the 1880s to 100s was the onset of some people becoming concerned about the big corporations monopolizing the market. There economy and business was booming at this period, and people were enjoying quality and cheaper products due to industrialization. The Second Industrial Revolution lead to “Most mainstream economists at the time opposed a national antitrust law because they saw it as a threat to those gains” (Sawyer, 4). According to the author, many economists felt like the introduction of trust bursting by the government was meant to limit their business goals, which relied on law doctrine that dictated that trade was a common contract between two individuals. Sherman Antitrust Act in the 1960s made a significant impact on the government effort to curb monopolies because it illegalized any form of trust between trust and buying out of small companies by big corporations. This ensured that the small corporations were protected from sabotage by big market players who were multi-b9illion comp[anise with an influence on the global market. However, the people who benefitted most from the Sherman Antitrust Act were the consumers who were protected from exploitation and sale of defective products. For decades the court relied on the Sherman Antitrust Act in ruling different petitions that were brought in the justice corridors. Still, Roosevelt, among all the U.S presidents, continues to hold the position of a president who fought hard against monopolization in the American markets. The impact of the Sherman Antitrust Act continues to –play an integral part in the modern United States
in the ruling of monopolies petitions.
The redress to the socio-legal issue of monopolization and trust bursting show approached critically by considering the limits \that a corporation should possess in a particular region. Many companies in an attempt to avoid being branded as monopolies\ and facing legal measures have turned to the region or state dominance, which has led to nationalization. The government should, therefore, increase its support to small and medium-sized enterprises to compete with larger corporations to avoid monopolies. Most of the time, SMEs face a lot of challenges when competing for the same markets with national or international corporations, and government funding can go a long way in making sure that the companies remain competitive. Mitchel (2016) states that the SMEs collapse “…presents evidence that their decline is owed, at least in part, to anticompetitive behavior by large, dominant corporations” According to the author the collapse of small business is a proof that monopolies impact still exists in the contemporary world and I believed that the redress to this social justice issues is not only trusted bursting but government support of SMEs with affordable loans and formulating policies that will favor their survival. The condition that is posed by the Big corporations today cannot be curb by the Sherman Antitrust Act because corporations have found loopholes in the law which they use to avoid legal actions. The Congress should also show commitment in coming up with laws and policies that address the modern-day monopolization of the market by big corporations such as Walmart, which has dominated the grocery business in the country. The entrepreneurship course in school can also help introduce competition in the market because of the innovation factors that are instilled in school. Rectification of existing monopolies today thus requires the government activation of small and medium-size companies through financial support and Congress enactment of laws that will ensure bog corporations are tamed in establishing monopolization.
The rise of monopolies and trust bursting continues to be a socio-legal issue in the contemporary world with big corporations challenging the Roosevelt beliefs of curbing trusts and mergers of companies. The United States government is faced with the challenge of protecting consumers and SMEs from exploitation by the international companies who continue to make significant gains in both the local and international markets. The best solution to this socio-legal issue is for the government to protect the small and medium-sized businesses by offering financial support they can offer competition to big corporations. The improvement of the Sherman Act should be revised through the incorporation of a specific percentage of market dominance so that corporations can stop using the loopholes in the act in getting away with their monopolization tactics. Trust bursting was an effective method in the 1880s but more radical changes need to be put in place to make sure that big corporation such as Walmart who have proven to control more than 70% in the local market.