< Back
Larger context for LACK in Corpus USbrown_UKbncw/UK_bncw.txt

However, Beacham and Jones (1971) came close to taking this line on the grounds that it is not possible to perform the cost-benefit exercise well enough to obtain a soundly based conclusion.
On the other hand they could see little merit in a policy based upon a rules approach, since rules are inevitably arbitrary and lacking in any underlying economic logic.
As a result they have considerable doubts about the validity of the case for the control of mergers.
More recently George ( 1989) has re-examined this approach, pointed out its drawbacks and concluded that the balance of theory and evidence does suggest that there is a need for a mergers policy.
On the other hand, economists of the Austrian tradition (e.g.
Littlechild 1981, 1989) have come closer to the laissez-faire view, partly as a consequence of their different interpretation of profit.
It is possible that they have had some influence upon the Government of the UK during the 1980s, which has been markedly less disposed to intervene as directly in industry than its predecessors.
However, most economists (and possibly politicians) do accept that some form of control is required, and that this has to be exercised within one of the alternative frameworks.