3 ms·
> For me, this is a textbook consequence of a "free market" based system. Free markets plus regulatory capture (and/or collusion). Unless you're arguing that t
by hansvm 5y ago
> For me, this is a textbook consequence of a "free market" based system.
Free markets plus regulatory capture (and/or collusion). Unless you're arguing that those additional constraints are inherent to free markets then I think there exist other viewpoints which allow one to be self-consistent.
- jraph 5y agoIndeed, collusions are part of the thing for me (wouldn't forbidding them be a regulation, which opposes free market?). I can understand that someone would want a free market but forbid collusions though. But are collusions a cause for an ISP raising there prices when there are no competitors?
- hansvm 5y ago> But are collusions a cause for an ISP raising there prices when there are no competitors? I think the argument is that collusions are one of a small number of reasons there aren't competitors. I.e., the act of raising prices in the absence of competition is all fine and dandy from a quasi-free market perspective, but there should be more competition.
- jraph 5y agoThis would sharply contrast with me being fine with a service being provided without competition as long as it is good (and then yes, you probably need it to be public or heavily regulated)