No, your are confusing or mixing the role of speculators and monoply makers. Yes, monoplies do tend to make prices higher. Speculators actually have the effect of making it HARDER for a group to create a monoply. To use my "corn example" again: Suppose some grupe of wealthy Mexicans, via influnce on the goprverment, gets high tariff on importing corn and then begins to buy corn growing land, hoping to create a corn monoply and sell tortia flour for douple the normal price, etc. Well fortunately there are speculators who will see this and also both buy up corn planting land (making the creation of a corn monoply more difficult) and ALSO they will be buying corn on the futures market, making the current price rise. Pedro, who was going to plant his land in beans, see that corn is going up in price NOW and decides to plan corn. So this too helps keep the price of corn flour for next years tortilas more reasonable by increasing the supply of corn. Again: Speculators perform a valuable service by advancing part of probable future effects (price changes usually) into the present so that the price changes are more smooth with less shock. They send a very valuable "signal" now about what is likely and production of what may be in short supply begins to increase sooner, making the damage less than it would be if there were no signal. Often the reason there is no signal*, is that the government is controlling the price, making speculation impossible and assuring that soon there will be a big shock and shortage. Rent controls are the classic example of how government create housing shortage in the future. Speculator can not act now to help prevent that future housing shortage. Keep the effect of monoplies and the effect of speculators clearly separated. One is helpful the other damaging. ------------------- *Centrally planned economies mainly collapse because they lack this market place signal which speculators strongly provide.