Pareto optimality states a change is efficient as long as at least one person is better off and no people are worse off as a result of that change. This has been the notion behind the break-up of many monopolies. Advocates believe consumers are better off if monopolies are separated into smaller, competing companies. Write a one page response that answers the following questions:
Do you think consumers are really better off as a result of monopoly break-ups? Are monopolies really that bad for society? Do you feel that companies that operated as monopolies are better off as a result of the break-ups? How are these questions relate to Pareto optimality?
