3 ms·

Does everybody lose? Sometimes I wonder if a wider distribution of power and "coopition" between countries isn't actually a good thing. And, to that end, China

Does everybody lose? Sometimes I wonder if a wider distribution of power and "coopition" between countries isn't actually a good thing. And, to that end, China seems to be making the right moves to grow its economy to the point where it can offer great opportunities to its best people. (But of course the world economy is a very complex and dynamic system, so take any such opinions with a grain of salt.)

hx87 10y ago
To put it in US terms, I don't want Comcast and Verizon to split up the market into their own monopolistic fiefdoms. I want them to compete hard in an open market for my business.
- bduerst 10y ago
  That's not a very good example. Communications is a natural monopoly - the barrier to entry in regional markets lends to less competition naturally. It's why most governments manage their natural monopolies to keep costs down.
  - hx87 10y ago
    > Communications is a natural monopoly At the backbone level, perhaps, but for historical reasons cable and phone companies were separate, and thus we have both Comcast and Verizon providing last-mile communication services. I already have both phone and cable lines to my apartment, so it's more of a natural duopoly there, and even duopolistic markets should have nonzero competition.
    - bduerst 10y ago
      It was just as much a natural monopoly historically as it is now. The last mile cost you talk about is the barrier to entry I mentioned. Again, it's not a very good example because (historically or not) it's a market that lends to less competition by default. Even Google is having problems with this natural monopoly: http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/15/12492890/google-fiber-wireless-plans-la-chicago-dallas http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/15/12492890/google-fiber-wire...
bduerst 10y ago
Why isn't two nations working together a good thing for their economies?

hx87 10y ago

To put it in US terms, I don't want Comcast and Verizon to split up the market into their own monopolistic fiefdoms. I want them to compete hard in an open market for my business.

bduerst 10y ago
That's not a very good example. Communications is a natural monopoly - the barrier to entry in regional markets lends to less competition naturally. It's why most governments manage their natural monopolies to keep costs down.
- hx87 10y ago
  > Communications is a natural monopoly At the backbone level, perhaps, but for historical reasons cable and phone companies were separate, and thus we have both Comcast and Verizon providing last-mile communication services. I already have both phone and cable lines to my apartment, so it's more of a natural duopoly there, and even duopolistic markets should have nonzero competition.
  - bduerst 10y ago
    It was just as much a natural monopoly historically as it is now. The last mile cost you talk about is the barrier to entry I mentioned. Again, it's not a very good example because (historically or not) it's a market that lends to less competition by default. Even Google is having problems with this natural monopoly: http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/15/12492890/google-fiber-wireless-plans-la-chicago-dallas http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/15/12492890/google-fiber-wire...

bduerst 10y ago

Why isn't two nations working together a good thing for their economies?