Started By
Message

re: Witch-hunting for Robber Barons: The Standard Oil Story

Posted on 1/10/19 at 4:28 pm to
Posted by I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
27843 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 4:28 pm to
How did the Sherman Anti Trust Act get passed if Rockefeller had the upper hand politically?
Posted by I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
27843 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 4:30 pm to
Should have been jailed for that. It is a crime. Did he do it?
This post was edited on 1/10/19 at 4:35 pm
Posted by rooster108bm
Member since Nov 2010
2909 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 4:47 pm to
IB Freeman, if you wanna tout capitalism you should have chosen George Westinghouse over Rockefeller.
Posted by KiwiHead
Auckland, NZ
Member since Jul 2014
27686 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 5:14 pm to
After 1901 and the assassination of McKinley, Rockefeller did not have a friend in the White House. Roosevelt and the old line money in New York, Boston, etc. were in control of h White House and they very much wanted t put up blocks on Rockefeller and some others.

Sooner or later, those who are not your friends end up in power and Roosevelt was not a "friend" of Rockefeller
Posted by WildTchoupitoulas
Member since Jan 2010
44071 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 5:42 pm to
quote:

Standard Oil did nothing economically or morally wrong.

Perhaps not in 1898, but they sure were doing immoral things in 1939-40, when they illegally sold large-scale octane control technology to the Germans.

While Rockefeller was a remarkable person, both icon and lightning rod, I hate to defend SO for anything. History shows we would've been better off if that company had been dissolved in 1898.
Posted by I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
27843 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 7:06 pm to
quote:

History shows we would've been better off if that company had been dissolved in 1898.


Point me to that history. Did you read the article in the OP?
Posted by Jyrdis
TD Premium Member Level III
Member since Aug 2015
12810 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 7:28 pm to
Hmm...are you promoting the theory of the second best?
Posted by I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
27843 posts
Posted on 1/10/19 at 7:39 pm to
You should go to the FEE website and get Mr. Reed's email address and send him an email. I have found most of those guys are happy to debate and discuss the issues of their articles.
Posted by Loserman
Member since Sep 2007
21955 posts
Posted on 1/14/19 at 5:44 am to
quote:

Between 1870 and 1885 the price of refined kerosene dropped from 26 cents to 8 cents per gallon. In the same period, the Standard Oil Company reduced the [refining] costs per gallon from almost 3 cents in 1870 to 0.452 cents in 1885. Clearly, the firm was relatively efficient, and its efficiency was being translated to the consumer in the form of lower prices for a much improved product, and to the firm in the form of additional profits.


quote:

Judging from the Record, Standard Oil did not use predatory price discrimination to drive out competing refiners, nor did its pricing practice have that effect. Whereas there may be a very few cases in which retail kerosene peddlers or dealers went out of business after or during price cutting, there is no real proof that Standard’s pricing policies were responsible. I am convinced that Standard did not systematically, if ever, use local price cutting in retailing, or anywhere else, to reduce competition. To do so would have been foolish; and, whatever else has been said about them, the old Standard organization was seldom criticized for making less money when it could readily have made more.


I almost never agree with you, but in this instance you are correct.

Standard oil never acted as a predatory monopoly.

John D ran his company as a model of efficiency. He constantly did things to be ale to cut costs.


An example.
While touring a plant that filled and sealed oil cans, Rockefeller observed a machine soldering tops to the cans.
The machines used 40 drops of solder to seal the cans.
He had them test the if 38 drops of solder would work
After testing a few cans per hundred would leak.
He then had them test 39 drops.
No cans leaked.
39 drops became the new standard and it saved that plant $2500 per year in materials cost.
Over the next decade that one change saved the company over 1 million.
Posted by foshizzle
Washington DC metro
Member since Mar 2008
40599 posts
Posted on 1/14/19 at 6:35 am to
quote:

I would highly recommend “The Prize” by Daniel Yergin.


Seconded.
Posted by Boatshoes
Member since Dec 2017
6775 posts
Posted on 1/14/19 at 7:37 am to
Monopoly and oligopoly are antithetical to a free market. It is the responsibility of government to break up such entities to ensure a healthy market. It's funny how some people talk about wanting free markets and then endorse entities that kill them. Almost like the real underlying reason for all their economic arguments is personal greed, not micro/macro theory.
This post was edited on 1/14/19 at 7:37 am
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram