4 ms·

I'm sure the argument made by the ISPs is valid. It's the basic concept of supply and demand. The demand for the service provided by the ISP is extremely price

I'm sure the argument made by the ISPs is valid. It's the basic concept of supply and demand. The demand for the service provided by the ISP is extremely price agnostic. Milk & Eggs use to be this way; prices have to rise astronomically before people start to consider supplements. The point the ISPs are missing is that this is the opposite of progress. A society does not prosper when everyone is paying the maximum amount they would be willing to pay. The opposite is true. Society prospers when they unlock discretionary income by spending less on something they would have paid more for... Furthermore and to that same point; the purpose of classifying something as a utility is to ensure they leave money on the table. If everyone was allowed to charge exactly what something was worth water would be infinitely more expensive.

dnautics 8y ago
> A society does not prosper when everyone is paying the maximum amount they would be willing to pay Actually if someone is paying the maximum amount they are willing to pay it maximizes incentive for an innovator to create efficiencies that bring the cost down for someone. That doesn't of course guarantee progress, because structural barriers and rent-seeking might kneecap that progress. If people are paying the lowest possible cost for something, then there is not progress, though there might be prosperity. (Generally speaking though social prosperity is destroyed by other things, like subsidies for the wealthy).