4 ms·

Using your logic, shouldn't access to knowledge and information (the internet) be a public service too? Shouldn't management have the imperative of increasing l

Using your logic, shouldn't access to knowledge and information (the internet) be a public service too? Shouldn't management have the imperative of increasing living conditions for the populace rather than generating capital apply to internet as well? The logic behind the reasoning for healthcare, education, banking, telcom being heavily regulated is extremely flawed. The real reason those sectors are heavily regulated is so they can lock in profits with little effort.

cpursley 14y ago
"The real reason those sectors are heavily regulated is so they can lock in profits with little effort." Exactly, how do so many people miss this?
livnev 14y ago
The internet is more than access to knowledge and information, and I agree that the sectors responsible for knowledge and information should have the imperative of increasing living conditions, and not generating capital. This is why Wikipedia should not be a business; this is why universities should not be businesses and this why they should receive tax dollars. Note however, that whether or not they should be regulated is a totally different matter. I was questioning the notion that the problem with banking, medicine, and education in the US is excessive regulation. On the other hand, companies like Amazon and Facebook have little to do with broadening access to knowledge and information (barring the latter in a trivial sense of the word), and are oriented towards generating capital, so I don't think the rhetorical questions that you open with are applicable here. I'd like to hear you elaborate on why the reasoning for regulation is flawed in the cases of healthcare, education, banking, telecom.