I'd like your feedback on this question, posed to me today in an e-mail:

I had a short discussion with a coworker about the college system --
outrageous college fees and other college related stuff. He stated
that the college system has a monopoly going. I agreed that colleges
have a sweet deal because college degrees are smiled upon, allowing them
to raise prices in accordance with competing colleges, but argued that I don't know if the college system can be considered a "monopoly," since we're talking about potentially thousands of colleges that are not affiliated with each other, unless you count that they all want students, give out degrees, and have to meet certain academic/accreditation standards to be considered worthwhile schools. He told me to look up the definition of "monopoly." What's your opinion? I guess if you consider all colleges in the same group, then yes, it is a monopoly; but doesn't that water down the meaning? I could say that all matter in the universe has a real monopoly on space within our universe, but what's the point of making such a general statement?

I wouldn't agree that colleges and unversities constitute a monopoly. There is no single person or group running all of them. They are also colleges that are not accredited that cost more than state-run and other private institutions. Also, the possession of a college degree is not required by law for most jobs that may indicate that a college degree is necessary. For instance, a law degree is not needed to practice law. If a persona can pass the bar exam without one, s/he can practice law in the US.

I also don't think this can be thought of as any kind of monopoly. They may well be price fixing or otherwise cooperating (which is probably illegal - I think it would be over here) but that isn't a monopoly.

~... 4 a person or a group having a ~ --Merriam Collegiate

Thus if the colleges can be called a group, then (at least loosely) they constitute a ~

quote:

Originally posted by dalehileman:
~... 4 a person or a group having a ~ --Merriam Collegiate

Thus if the colleges can be called a group, then (at least loosely) they constitute a ~

If you read it that way then word becomes essentially meaningless. You could say that manufacturers of, say, woolly hats have a monopoly because they can all be lumped into a group called "manufacturers of woolly hats".

I agree.

Our culture has allowed the construction and maintenance of a powerful "higher-education" system, a self-perpetuating tower of bullshit built on a base of fraud.

But it's not a monopoly.

Bob: If there were less competition in the wooly-hat industry, if wooly-hat makers were considered an exclusive group, and if their activities appeared collusive, then they would probably be called a ~

(At least, loosely)

When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master—that's all.'

[Lewis Carroll, AKA Charles L. Dodgson, Oxonian Academic]

quote:

~... 4 a person or a group having a ~ --Merriam Collegiate

dale, I'll assume your argument is meant to be frivolous.

You cannot on the one hand point out that a dictionary defines it as

~... 4 a person or a group having a ~ --Merriam Collegiate

and then arbitrarily add to that definition the words exclusive, less competetive and collusive and then further suggest that this somehow allows you to "loosely" use the word monopoly to describe something that clearly isn't.

Even were all your conditions to be fulfilled it still wouldn't be a monopoly.

If your argument isn't meant to be frivolous then it is simply mistaken.

(zm I was going to suggest that the Humpty DUmpty principle doesn't really apply in real life but you beat me to it as I was posting the first half of my answer.)

Agreed that college isn't a monopoly, at least in the U.S. There are private colleges that are very, very expensive (unfortunately the chosen colleges of each of my kids!), but there are less expensive private colleges, especially some of the religious ones. There are state colleges and universities that are big bargains, and there are even military colleges (I am not sure if they are free or not). There are community colleges that will give you that first 2 years of education for almost nothing, and in most states there is a mandatory articulation between those community colleges and the state system.

It is clear that universities in the U.S. are not monopolies.

In re the tussle over what constitutes a monopoly, it seems to me that the term everyone is struggling for but not coming up with is: cartel -- or, in some historical contexts: pool. Or: trust.

Also, for those who would broaden the scope of the term to the point of universality (and hence meaninglesness), I recommend the term "oligopoly" as a stopgap.

David

quote:

For instance, a law degree is not needed to practice law. If a persona can pass the bar exam without one, s/he can practice law in the US.

I think you're mistaken there, z. Last I heard, Vermont was the only stated that allowed one to practice law without graduating an accedited law school and passing the test. (And if one took that Vermont path, there were other study requirement in lieu of law school.)

Last I heard, Vermont was the only stated that allowed one to practice law without graduating an accedited law school and passing the test.

Oh, well, can't win 'em all. I notice that the Calif. Bar allows for attending an unaccredited law school and taking the bar exam, and also doing an apprenticeship in a law office or a judge's chambers and taking the bar exam. I don't really remember where I got my curious idea, but perhaps it was in a former life ... NB: IANAL.

quote:

Originally posted by saranita:


I had a short discussion with a coworker

He orks cows? "co-worker" is a word that fairly begs for a hyphen.

Re the intent of the post: A guild or union also defines the situation.

"Life is not school"

Ignacio Silone

Lovely: another soul who is (mis)led to divide the word as "cow-orker"!

This could be another brief gamelet: coming up with other deliberately mis-split words, and maybe defining the result -- in a chetongueek manner, of course.

BTW, does anyone else get tempted to pronounce "misled" as "mizzled"?

David

quote:

Originally posted by Froeschlein:


This could be another brief gamelet: coming up with other deliberately mis-split words, and maybe defining the result -- in a chetongueek manner, of course.

OK, start the game in Wordplay!

quote:

BTW, does anyone else get tempted to pronounce "misled" as "mizzled"?

David

Yes, alas... (And that's "all ass")

Cow-orker for co-worker and mizzled for mis-led is another example of reanalysis.

And if one hears "urinalysis" instead of "your analysis?" Is that a mis-pisseption?

An example of this is a company called "Pen Island", who make pens. They have a famously ill-chosen domain name, http://www.penisland.net/, which attracts the "wrong sort" of visitor to their site!

Anybody ever hear of Coalinga, California? Interesting place name,that. Also, I have long entertained a notion about the name of Novi, Michigan. So, I just googled it and, guess what...they deny it!

I get a "dud link" message when trying your link, Asa.

Me,too. Dud link.

OK, try this one:http://www.pitstopbooks.com/james-novi.html

The name, "Novi" wasn't just applied to a town, it seems.

quote:

Originally posted by Asa Lovejoy:
OK, try this one:http://www.pitstopbooks.com/james-novi.html

The name, "Novi" wasn't just applied to a town, it seems.

I've never heard of a Novi car. O.K. Lemme guess...they got their name by always finishing 6th?

I believe such a situation, involving lack of real competition between supposedly rival companies, is called a cartel.

If we have many small independent buyers and sellers, then free markets are very efficient at matching and setting prices.

Monopolies are just one among MANY factors which distort markets.

Other methods of rent-seeking include monopsonies, guilds, unions, cartels, taxes, tariffs, and regulation.

Tacit agreements hold for a while, until a cartel member cheats (cf OPEC).

Regulation is another distortion. In the name of "public interest," a group gets itself ensconced in law. For example, you cannot buy a coffin directly from the manufacturer. You must go through a state-licensed mortician.

SO, "monopoly" is sometimes used loosely to define anything that negates the assumptions of free market.

(This makes an interesting sidenote to the thread on rentiers)

quote:

Originally posted by Robert Arvanitis:
you cannot buy a coffin directly from the manufacturer. You must go through a state-licensed mortician.

Another reason for organ donation followed by cremation. But then, not just anybody can render you a pile of ash either. Sigh......

Because I have a very warped mind, thinking about coffins reminds me of the opening scene from the movie, "Mouse Hunt."

quote:

Regulation is another distortion. In the name of "public interest," a group gets itself ensconced in law.

Well, Robert, I work in regulation. We work very hard, in a lot of different venues to protect the public. We are very careful not to overburden nurses with regulations. Further, nursing is rethinking discipline so as to consider system errors and remediation, rather than just punishment.

Most regulators I have worked with are highly intelliegent, caring people who really do want to protect the public. You'd be just shocked if you saw what we see in regulation. I can't imagine what would happen if regulation (at least in nursing) didn't exist.

Since we are the only ones who license nurses, I suppose we could be considered a monopoly. Yet, I cringe to think what would happen if it all became a business. As it is, there are 2 accreditation agencies in nursing. Since they compete with each other, it's in their best interests to lower their standards in order to get business...and they do. Thank goodness for the regulators.

[I suppose one could consider me to be a little biased on this subject. ]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

Fair point, kalleh. And nurses are the premier example of the "caring professions."

But especially in other, less-caring arenas, we always must be on guard against regulatory capture, when the regulated gain undue influence over the regulated, and bend a public purpose to private ends. Prime example -- utilites and the rate setting mechanism.

Oh, yes, I know, Robert.

And even in nursing sometimes states have terribly punitive rules. I facilitated a focus group of operations people from boards once and got very annoyed to hear the petty things that can be recorded on your nursing license. For example, in some states if you have a barking dog and someone reports you, that can be recorded on your nursing license! Similarly, if you are fishing without a license, that can be recorded on your nursing license! I let them know how totally ridiculous that is.