3 ms·

Regulations destroy competition. Sometimes that's a sacrifice you want to make - do you want an unregulated drug market or would you reduce the number particip

Regulations destroy competition. Sometimes that's a sacrifice you want to make - do you want an unregulated drug market or would you reduce the number participants with burdensome regulations? - but I don't think you can regulate your way to competition. Or to lower prices.

AstralStorm 10y ago
That depends on whether said regulation actually increases barriers to entry or decreases them. Anti-cartel ones do the latter. Many properly made regulations are not easier to adhere to by big vs small agents.
droopyEyelids 10y ago
US history is rife with examples that contradict you. (anti-trust regulation) Regulation is a tool, and it does more or less what the tool user intends it to.
- mtanski 10y ago
  I'm going to object to the "more or less what the tool user intends it to". Our economy and political system is chockfull with examples of unintended consequences. Both majority parties are guilting of this.
therpe1 10y ago
> Regulations destroy competition. It's worth pointing out that this is nonsense. In virtually every other developed country in the world regulation has actually increased competition between ISPs. The result has been internet service that is dramatically better, faster and cheaper than what is available to most Americans. It's worth taking a very close look at France[1] and South Korea[2] in particular. Or you can continue to believe complete fucking nonsense like "regulations destroy competition" and plod ahead with crappy internet while the few monopoly ISPs that exist hoover up virtually all your personal data. [1] http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/we-need-real-competition-not-a-cable-internet-monopoly http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/we-need-real-com... [2] http://www.idgconnect.com/abstract/8960/why-does-south-korea-have-fastest-internet http://www.idgconnect.com/abstract/8960/why-does-south-korea...

AstralStorm 10y ago

That depends on whether said regulation actually increases barriers to entry or decreases them. Anti-cartel ones do the latter. Many properly made regulations are not easier to adhere to by big vs small agents.

droopyEyelids 10y ago

US history is rife with examples that contradict you. (anti-trust regulation) Regulation is a tool, and it does more or less what the tool user intends it to.

mtanski 10y ago
I'm going to object to the "more or less what the tool user intends it to". Our economy and political system is chockfull with examples of unintended consequences. Both majority parties are guilting of this.

therpe1 10y ago

> Regulations destroy competition. It's worth pointing out that this is nonsense. In virtually every other developed country in the world regulation has actually increased competition between ISPs. The result has been internet service that is dramatically better, faster and cheaper than what is available to most Americans. It's worth taking a very close look at France[1] and South Korea[2] in particular. Or you can continue to believe complete fucking nonsense like "regulations destroy competition" and plod ahead with crappy internet while the few monopoly ISPs that exist hoover up virtually all your personal data. [1] http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/we-need-real-competition-not-a-cable-internet-monopoly http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/we-need-real-com... [2] http://www.idgconnect.com/abstract/8960/why-does-south-korea-have-fastest-internet http://www.idgconnect.com/abstract/8960/why-does-south-korea...