4 ms·

Hmm, what about the US prohibition for municipal utilities to provide network service and compete on the micro local level?

by eecc 7y ago

rayiner 7y ago
First, there are no such prohibitions at the U.S. (i.e. federal) level. Some states have such laws. Second, that is a poor example of regulations that "make it hard to start a new ISP and compete with the incumbents." Presumably, that's talking about upstart private competition. What you're saying is the opposite. Government entities or government-sanctioned monopolies (like the local power or water utility) don't in any sense "compete" with the private sector. They displace it. If you're a startup ISP, you can't hope to compete with say the local electric utility, which can make large capital investments in network service and recover from captive electricity rate payers. As an aside, the idea of government entities "competing" is a weird new brand of rhetoric (you also see it with the "public option"). I'm not sure where it comes from, but it makes no sense. If you're a New Deal liberal and believe government would do something better than the private sector, then own that. Don't pretend like private companies can meaningfully compete with an entity that doesn't have to turn a profit to stay in business.
- eecc 7y ago
  Well, I’m European... and especially with all the commotion about Ajit Pai, excuse me if I conflate the US federal institution with individual states... Second, in this case I remember reading of private monopolies arguing against municipalities threatening to roll out their own networks, exasperated by the poor service provided by the private sector. Over here, I enjoy the “Fruits of Socialism” (while they last) where private service providers have to co-own the infra and complain about regulators keeping a relatively open eye on them ;)

4 ms·

Hmm, what about the US prohibition for municipal utilities to provide network service and compete on the micro local level?

by eecc 7y ago

Hmm, what about the US prohibition for municipal utilities to provide network service and compete on the micro local level?

rayiner 7y ago
First, there are no such prohibitions at the U.S. (i.e. federal) level. Some states have such laws. Second, that is a poor example of regulations that "make it hard to start a new ISP and compete with the incumbents." Presumably, that's talking about upstart private competition. What you're saying is the opposite. Government entities or government-sanctioned monopolies (like the local power or water utility) don't in any sense "compete" with the private sector. They displace it. If you're a startup ISP, you can't hope to compete with say the local electric utility, which can make large capital investments in network service and recover from captive electricity rate payers. As an aside, the idea of government entities "competing" is a weird new brand of rhetoric (you also see it with the "public option"). I'm not sure where it comes from, but it makes no sense. If you're a New Deal liberal and believe government would do something better than the private sector, then own that. Don't pretend like private companies can meaningfully compete with an entity that doesn't have to turn a profit to stay in business.
- eecc 7y ago
  Well, I’m European... and especially with all the commotion about Ajit Pai, excuse me if I conflate the US federal institution with individual states... Second, in this case I remember reading of private monopolies arguing against municipalities threatening to roll out their own networks, exasperated by the poor service provided by the private sector. Over here, I enjoy the “Fruits of Socialism” (while they last) where private service providers have to co-own the infra and complain about regulators keeping a relatively open eye on them ;)