6 ms·
"bad monopolies".. so which monopolies are good?
by dotborg 14y ago
"bad monopolies".. so which monopolies are good?
- RobAtticus 14y agoMonopolies are not inherently bad. A monopoly on some good or service might be that way because it provides the best product at a fair price and there's no way somebody else could beat them. It's only when a monopoly starts using its position of power to either unfairly gain advantage in a similar market, start screwing over customers that they become "bad," or some other tactic that ruins competition or hurts consumers.
- __alexs 14y ago> Monopolies are not inherently bad. Yes they are. They are bad because they are a massive risk center to their customers. For a small industry this is just kind of annoying, but for a massive one it can have a detrimental effect on the entire economy and not having massive single points of failure in your economy should be (and sometimes is) considered a matter of national security.
- TylerE 14y agoTry convincing someone to build out basic utilities without giving them one. I like to be able to flush my toilet, personally.
- stinkytaco 14y agoWhat about wireless spectrum? Should we just give access to spectrum to everyone who wants it? Your radio, cell phone and wireless Internet would stop working within weeks, I'm sure. Sometime monopoly is not only good, but necessary.
- __alexs 14y agoThat the status quo for RF spectrum is that of government granted monopoly in most of the world is not evidence that this is a necessary way to operate. In fact there have been numerous proposals to change the regulation of important RF ranges into a more typical commons based usage model. e.g. the "whitespace" wireless broadband systems that are still fighting their way through the FCC regulatory quagmire in the US. I'd even argue that the regional monopoly system we currently have actually frequently does have to act in communal ways in the best interests of different providers across regulatory regions. People without billions of dollars on the table just aren't allowed in those conversations.
- stinkytaco 14y agoI'm not entirely sure that we have locked out people without billions of dollars. I followed closely and commented on the low power FM rollout (I managed a college radio station at the time) and though it wasn't perfect, I do feel it was a major step. It allowed many small broadcasters to enter the market that would not otherwise have had an opportunity. I don't have anything against whitespace spectrum (though I do feel it becomes a shoving match of who has the biggest tower), but there are certain applications that demand a monopolized spectrum, such as cell phones. If providers were not able to provide national, dedicated networks, the cell phone industry as we know it could not exist. This is not to say that cell phones wouldn't exist (perhaps just a patchwork of regional providers), but the level of seamless service that consumers have come to demand would not. Even a patchwork of regional carriers would require regionalized monopolies. Why would you go to the trouble and cost of building a tower if someone can just build another, larger one next to it?
- sp332 14y agoWhen you are the first to produce something, you have a monopoly over the production until someone else can copy you.
- jarito 14y agoInsurance for one. The original idea for insurance was that it was a not for profit enterprise that gets better the more people that are participating. We've bastardized that with private insurance, but in theory, an insurance monopoly is a good thing since it creates the best allocation of resources.
- nikcub 14y agoarmies
- dotborg 14y agoit depends on point of view
- mtgx 14y agoGoogle search.
- jkn 14y agoGoogle search may be good but do you really mean it is a good thing they have a monopoly? (which was I think the question)
- wmeredith 14y agoMajor League Baseball and the NFL are government sanctioned and enforced monopolies because breaking up the talent into competing leagues would be be ad for the sport.
- maxerickson 14y agoOver the years, MLB has been exempted from antitrust enforcement. The government does nothing to enforce monopolies in the sports world (remember the XFL? It failed because not enough people watched. Also, there are pro/semipro baseball teams not affiliated with MLB. A somewhat local to me example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traverse_City_Beach_Bums http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traverse_City_Beach_Bums).
- wmeredith 14y agoI was misinformed, apparently. Thanks for clearing that up.
- rmc 14y agoThe state has a monopoly on violence that can only be wielded in certain circumstances and certain rules. Most people think that is a good idea.
- stinkytaco 14y agoUtilities, roads, wireless spectrum, really anything that requires everyone to agree on a standard set of rules for it to work. Can you imagine if roads were built like web browsers? It's one thing to have a website not work in your web browser, but when someone's safety is at stake, I'm a big fan of standardization. Of course -- and I've said this before -- anything important enough to be a monopoly is important enough to be heavily regulated in order to operate in the public interest (as utilities, roads and spectrum are).