2 ms·
The threat of possible disruption from an uncertain direction 10 years down the line is of a very different nature than the threat posed by direct, immediate co
by jjoonathan 11y ago
The threat of possible disruption from an uncertain direction 10 years down the line is of a very different nature than the threat posed by direct, immediate competition. Why do you think it's "lazy" to find one type of competition less desirable and then notice and complain when certain markets seem to consistently gravitate towards it?
- mwsherman 11y agoI don’t think what you’re describing is wrong. But a belief that something is a natural monopoly causes us to make policy choices based on a flawed assumption. Flawed choices about the inevitability of a monopoly tend to entrench same. E.g. our municipal broadband monopolies trace back to a belief that wireline phone and TV can only be monopolies. And maybe it’s true! But we might have chosen differently, had we not assumed it a natural outcome. We might have assumed that wireless is a natural monopoly. Gladly, we didn’t. (Though spectrum policy can be more competitive.)
- marklgr 11y agoThis is not about inevitability and immortality of monopolies, but their likelihood and the detrimental effects they bring on while they exists. Both can be pretty high in some domains, so it is worthwhile to think about it, to me.
- jjoonathan 11y ago> But we might have chosen differently Please elaborate on what you mean by "chosen."