There's Nothing Free Market About the Board Game Monopoly

[Kamaji]

There's Nothing Free Market About the Board Game Monopoly

For an economics lesson, Nina Turner should try out Catan.

ROBBY SOAVE
7.27.2023

Nina Turner is a former Ohio state senator, internet personality, and self-described democratic socialist. She often feuds with libertarians about "Medicare for All," minimum wage, and other economic policies.

This week, she tweeted the following: "There's literally a children's board game that demonstrates that 'free-market capitalism' always leads to one person controlling everything."

*  *  *

One presumes that she is referring to the board game Monopoly. Assuming that's the case, this is a deeply flawed reference. In actuality, Monopoly's winner-take-all dynamics do not reflect poorly on capitalism, free markets, or even property acquisition.

First, a bit of history. Monopoly was designed in the early 1900s by Lizzie Magie, a feminist activist, anti-monopolist, and a disciple of Henry George—a Progressive Era economist who supported a single tax on land value. George's views weren't entirely incompatible with free markets; he supported free trade, opposed protectionist measures like tariffs, and thought a single tax on land value was the most efficient way for the government to raise revenue without penalizing development and other productive economic activities.

Magie wanted Monopoly—originally called The Landlord's Game—to promote Georgism by showing that monopolists grabbing up property is a pernicious danger if not counteracted by a land value tax. Monopoly was never intended as an argument against free market capitalism per se.

As such, the rules and game mechanics don't exactly undermine the legitimacy of the capitalist system. As most people know from playing the game—which is weirdly popular, despite being somewhat unrewarding at both casual and advanced levels of play—Monopoly involves rolling dice, moving game pieces onto game spaces, buying property, and collecting rent. Players earn more money from their properties if they also own neighboring spaces and then develop them. There are gains to be had from trading properties with other players, but market mechanisms are mostly absent.

*  *  *

If Turner wanted to learn more about free markets—and play a much more enjoyable game than Monopoly—she could check out Catan. In Catan, players gain and trade resources in other to acquire settlements, build roads, and further develop their land. The trading mechanic is key and, in the long run, rewards all players: At the game's end, everybody's civilizations are more impressive than they would have been without market-induced cooperation.

(For more expert board game fans, I would also recommend Agricola, which shows how hard it was for people to feed themselves prior to the creation of capitalism. Its tagline is "The 17th century, not a very easy time for farming!")

*  *  *

Source:  https://reason.com/2023/07/27/monopoly-board-games-nina-turner-trade-land-value/

[PeteS in CA]

Unlike reality, "Monopoly" is a zero-sum game. Play cannot go beyond the limited number of properties on the board and the limited number of improvements - houses and hotels - available in the game.

Reality is closer to a crayon rails game (i.e. the "Empire Builder" series), in which options for routing and city-entries are almost unlimited (especially in two-player playings).

[Kamaji]

Unlike reality, "Monopoly" is a zero-sum game. Play cannot go beyond the limited number of properties on the board and the limited number of improvements - houses and hotels - available in the game.

Reality is closer to a crayon rails game (i.e. the "Empire Builder" series), in which options for routing and city-entries are almost unlimited (especially in two-player playings).

Monopoly was intentionally designed to be anti-capitalist propaganda, so it's no surprise that it ends up showing what it's designer intended.

[PeteS in CA]

"Monopoly"'s history includes some evolution from the original "Landlord's Game", but it only ends when one player owns everything and all others are bankrupt. "Empire Builder" series games, https://res-games.com/ *, per the rules, end when the first player to attain certain goals declares that (s)he has done so. Other players may be as little as one turn from attaining those goals (or be far from the goals due to horrible luck). Making a board game something close to open-ended like that is not easy, but "Monopoly" is designedly a zero-sum-game.

* The "Empire Builder" series of games was originally created and sold by Mayfair Games, but after corporate buyout(s) the series has been out of print for quite a few years (with no new-old stock copies available). Res-Games has recreated many of the games and is also offering fan-created originals.

[berdie]

I guess I have a hard time getting excited or offended by this. It's nothing more than a game. And truth be told, a pretty fun one.