> The solution to most monopolies and other over-concentrations of market power isn't small-fry consumers attempting to compete with them directly; that idea do

> The solution to most monopolies and other over-concentrations of market power isn't small-fry consumers attempting to compete with them directly; that idea doesn't even pass the smell test. The actual solution is some kind of government regulatory action, and the complaining you deride is part of the process to (possibly) make that happen. You do realize that all the problems you listed exist because of regulation or can also be solved with regulation? Maybe instead of regulating how Comcast does business we should regulate things so it's easy to have many ISPs. That has a lot more benefits than trying to baby sit the one ISP: * more jobs (many small companies are less efficient than one large company, economy of scale in reverse, leading to more jobs to do the same amount of work) * better local community impact (decisions that impact the community aren't being made by people living somewhere far) * more competition (better services, better prices, see some of the places where there's a lot of ISP competition are also the places that have the best cheap Internet and also overlaps with places with not very strong regulation, or enforcement, that directly affects running an ISP) When I talk about relaxed regulation that affects ISPs I don't mean relaxed labor regulation (minimum wages, benefits), the bulk of the labor costs for an ISP comes from people that are payed much over minimum wage and get good benefits. But I do mean things like copyright strikes/enforcement and other Internet regulations, I mean things that control who and how can install wires, a fair market to rent existing wires and interconnect with existing ISPs.