Question

This article (Links to an external site.) suggests, based on significant evidence, that competition in US markets is not only constrained, but is becoming less so, as fewer companies dominate business (Links to an external site.). The high profits and rising stock markets we have seen recently are significantly linked to this, rather than to a more competitive economy. Our model of Supply & Demand is based on a model of perfectly competitive markets. If our markets are not competitive, how does that affect this model? Read the first article and the full Introduction (at least) to the Brookings study. Submit your answer in the box. It should be a few paragraphs long and include a reference to an additional academic-level outside evidence to back up what you are saying.

Answer 1

Follows are the solution to this question.

Step-by-step explanation:

When economies aren't truly competitive, it can have a different monopoly or oligopoly or a monopoly competition, which leads to greater productivity or decreased level and barriers to access and excessive consumer spending than that of the aggregate supply, which causes price rises, and also inflation. It is the result of the fact, that economies are not fully efficient. Consequently, fewer companies control and divest of small and new players with reduced cash flows. Mostly as result, the fundamentals of market forces are changed by technology, fast-generation immigrant advantage, and sustainable supply, that centralizes market structures ever further.