3 ms·
I don't understand how these things are connected. The market being free doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the customer is satisfied - take teleco
by mxkopy 3y ago
I don't understand how these things are connected. The market being free doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the customer is satisfied - take telecom in the U.S. for example. Competition is sparse and nobody is satisfied.
What you're describing is a buyer's market, which is only one case out of many.
- monero-xmr 3y agoTelecom is one of the most highly regulated industries on earth. Bad example for trying to argue against free markets.
- mxkopy 3y agoTelecom has little competition because of high barriers to entry, not regulation. I just don't understand how to square this > because a corporation cannot even satisfy the needs of consumers within their narrow band of production (or else competitors wouldn't exist, and further enhancements of products would be unnecessary). against the reality that there are monopolies that don't satisfy consumers and that some companies profitably degrade their products over time.
- monero-xmr 3y agoThis is why I said "in a truly free market" in my explanation. Telecom is far from a truly free market. No matter how much capital you have, you cannot enter the market as a new provider, without regulators approving a huge variety of things, not just wavelength and radio stuff but also the right to exist at all as a provider of such telecom services. This introduces all manner of possibilities for corruption, lobbying, etc. that lead to monopolies. IMO the main cause of monopolistic behavior is government regulation rather than natural tendencies of the free market (but that's up for debate and my position is unpopular).