[dragonwriter]

> On a related note, I would like to postulate that monopolies are inherently anti-consumer because they are anti competitive by design.

Monopolies are the fact of absence of competition by definition, but not necessarily anti-competitive by design.

But the absence of competition in a market isn't always bad for consumers.

First, a market may not be a consumer market, and more importantly monopolies may be bad for customers because they may improve the product that can be offered. (Netflix acquiring competition had made each streaming services worse, with smaller and less stable libraries and rising prices; it's been a bonanza for content owners, but not consumers.) One factor in why monopolies can be better for consumers is that they tend also to be monopsonies.