▁government ▁should ▁not ▁interven e . ▁They ▁argue ▁that ▁competition ▁with ▁these ▁mon opol ies ▁is ▁open ▁to ▁any ▁firm ▁that ▁can ▁offer ▁lower ▁prices ▁or ▁better ▁products ▁— that ▁competition ▁is ▁not ▁ex cluded . ▁They ▁claim ▁that ▁these ▁mon opol ies ▁keep ▁their ▁prices ▁low ▁precisely ▁because ▁they ▁are ▁not ▁ex empt ▁from ▁compet itive ▁forces . ▁In ▁other ▁words , ▁the ▁possibility ▁of ▁competition ▁ar ising ▁indeed ▁affect s ▁their ▁pr icing ▁and ▁production ▁dec isions . ▁A ▁co er ci ve ▁mon opol y ▁would ▁be ▁able ▁to ▁price - g ou ge ▁consum ers ▁secure ▁in ▁the ▁knowledge ▁that ▁no ▁competition ▁could ▁develop . ▁Some ▁see ▁low ▁prices ▁as ▁evidence ▁for ▁a ▁non - co er ci ve ▁mon opol y . ▁ ▁Government ▁mon opol ies ▁Und is put ed ▁examples ▁of ▁co er ci ve ▁mon opol ies ▁are ▁those ▁that ▁are ▁enfor ced ▁by ▁law . ▁In ▁a ▁government ▁mon opol y , ▁an ▁ag ency ▁under ▁the ▁direct ▁authority ▁of ▁the ▁government ▁itself ▁holds ▁the ▁mon opol y , ▁and ▁the ▁co er ci ve ▁mon opol y ▁status ▁is ▁sust ained ▁by ▁the ▁enfor cement ▁of ▁laws ▁or ▁reg ulations ▁that ▁ban ▁competition , ▁or ▁reserve ▁exclusive ▁control ▁over ▁factors ▁of ▁production ▁for ▁the ▁government . ▁The ▁state - owned ▁pet role um ▁companies ▁that ▁are ▁common ▁in ▁oil - rich ▁developing ▁countries ▁( such ▁as ▁Ar am co ▁in ▁Sa udi ▁Arab ia ▁or ▁P D V SA ▁in ▁Venezuela ) ▁are