[ucaetano]

From the Department of Justice:

For this reason, antitrust law does not regard as illegal the mere possession of monopoly power where it is the product of superior skill, foresight, or industry. Where monopoly power is acquired or maintained through anticompetitive conduct, however, antitrust law properly objects.

A monopoly that doesn't abuse its market power to prevent competition is either a natural monopoly or a temporary situation.

Neither of those are anti-trust issues.

[dools]

Okay so they're not illegal. I wouldn't say "perfectly fine" though... As you point out, it's a temporary situation in the case that they're not being anti-competitive. I would argue that any situation where there is a natural monopoly it should be state run rather than privately run because that situation is, by its very nature, anti-competitive (first in, best dressed!)

[ucaetano]

> Okay so they're not illegal. I wouldn't say "perfectly fine" though

From a anti-trust perspective, not-illegal is perfectly fine.

> I would argue that any situation where there is a natural monopoly it should be state run rather than privately run because that situation is, by its very nature, anti-competitive (first in, best dressed!)

Argue as much as you want, the real world has consistently shown that government-run enterprises, with rare exceptions, are inefficient drains of resources.

[dools]

> the real world has consistently shown that government-run enterprises, with rare exceptions, are inefficient drains of resources.

That is a ridiculous assertion, that stems purely from libertarian propaganda.