"A free market does a very good job of providing most things other than a free market." Much (possibly most) regulation is harmful, but some is good or even ne

"A free market does a very good job of providing most things other than a free market." Much (possibly most) regulation is harmful, but some is good or even necessary. Given that ISPs tend to have local monopolies, they need to be prevented from abusing those monopolies like they've started trying to do. If the having local monopolies is not taken as a given, and the local governments don't hand out monopoly powers... well you still have to deal with how the high up-front costs of laying new wires makes various anti-competitive tactics more effective, and how the already meager competition seems to be merging into fewer and fewer competitors. So in this case, you can either regulate to try to preserve a mostly-free market (lots of antitrust investigations and suits) in last-mile connectivity, or assume a monopoly and regulate to minimize the damage it can cause. The first probably minimizes harm to the regulated industry, the second minimizes harm to industries damaged by monopolistic actions in the regulated industry. I expect that the last-mile industry itself is relatively low value compared to the industries it can damage (much like water, electricity, and phone service), so the second option would be preferable.