I agree, but about the part about nationalization of companies. Historically it tended to produce bad outcomes. People just don't put the same effort if they do

I agree, but about the part about nationalization of companies. Historically it tended to produce bad outcomes. People just don't put the same effort if they don't own it. What actually works is government stepping in by producing a competitor when it sees oligopolies developing and the participating companies not innovating further but just undermining each other or colluding to undermine interests of their customers. For example in the early railroads there were tons of companies building their own railroads instead of coopearing with others to reuse. Telecommunication networks tend to get stuck similarly. That's how AT&T was created to have a single infrastructure entity and lot of competition on top of that infrastructure. Similar situation can be observed in social networks today. The business model for them is not that great unless you infect them with advertisement. Twitter struggled a lot with monetization because it feels more like a infrastructure project similar to roads or phone lines. Perhaps it is time for government to create competing social network or just pump support money to a community created one.