Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r16982679 en Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:55:18 EDT Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:55:18 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988875 LegoPower77 : When I say free market, I don't mean a perfectly competitive one. Degrees of market concentration are unimportant, in some cases a highly-competitive market works best and in others, they don't. The processor market is super-concentrated, but it's damn cut throat, too.

A company that makes monopoly rent can and does offer a benefit because they have the resources for research and development. Standard Oil in 1870 sold refined oil at $26.4/bbl and had 4% market share. By 1911, they had brought the price down to $4.7/bbl and had 69% market share. Same scenario for Alcoa, in 1887 a pound of aluminum sold for $5-8, by 1941 it was down to 15¢/lb.

This is why the Hayek quote, "Enthusiasm for perfect competition in theory and the support of monopoly in practice are indeed surprisingly often found to live together."

said by broadbander See Profile :

Utilities are very odd and particular markets though, not exactly prithee to typical market rules.
Fair enough. That Regulatory Reform article in my other post shows the "rightist" side of the public utilities conundrum.
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988875 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:46:11 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988679 LegoPower77 : No, I fault the artificial market structure created by the politicians out in lotusland, though. Arbitrage is not evil. It's always the law of unintended consequences and the regulators failed because they're not all-knowing and set up incentive for eeevil businessmen to make a profit.
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988679 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:17:42 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988636 morbo :
said by LegoPower77 See Profile :

If you want to believe in conspiracies and such, fine.
did you forget about the price manipulation in the California electricity market or are you just ignoring it?

there is evidence that this stuff has happened, so to just blame it on "conspiracies" is just sticking your head in the sand.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988636 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:11:58 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988494 LegoPower77 : I agree with qualifications. I do think we're on the same page more than not. For one thing, we, as a nation would be much better off if we adhered to the principle of subsidiarity. But alas, state's rights=racism anymore.

Since you're in the industry, you may be interested in an academics take on New Zeland's attempt at deregulation. (The By-line is wrong, Vernon Smith is now at George Mason in Fairfax, VA.) Be warned, it is long.

Maybe you'd be interested, this is short, another professor at Mason has a weekly column, a recent one is on ideological point.

As long as we're talking ideology, I disagree slightly with your "grand ideological" sweeps statement. The only way subsidiarity is to work is if we adhere to the idea of limited government as set forth in the law. It's said we have a "living, breathing Constitution," but if that's so, then the law—the limit on government—"becomes a mere ball of wax" and there is no real limit on the powers of government.
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988494 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 22:49:57 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988432 broadbander :
There's nothing about free markets that guarantees Always Low Prices.
There is according to theory. Well, no, not low prices, but c.o.p plus the smallest fraction of one cent (if competition truly exists).

Utilities are very odd and particular markets though, not exactly prithee to typical market rules.

reply to morbo

said by morbo :

(it created an incentive to providers and the stock market players to manipulate prices as desired, under the guise of gaining free market efficiencies).
If you want to believe in conspiracies and such, fine. I can tell you, as a person who follows markets, prices oscillate back and forth for one reason or another. There's nothing we can do to stop the ebb and flow of things because as long as there are differences, conditions will always change.

The commodity markets actually reduce drastic price shocks because eeevil speculators are willing to take the risk of holding their wealth in a volatile good allowing the producer to have a stable business plan.

Regulation is not the panacea that will prevent people from having to confront costs (i.e., unlimited wants/limited resources). There's nothing about free markets that guarantees Always Low Prices. Always.© I don't know what the politicians out there said about deregulation; deregulation and free markets aren't the same thing. (Indeed, one cardinal requirement of free markets is contract enforcement, which naturally would require legal rules, i.e., regulation.)

All a common theme of my posts over the years is that we would, in most cases, have a superior outcome if we allowed the discovery process that entrepreneurs use to gain advantage be allowed to run it's natural course regardless of the structure of the market (even where there is a highly-concentrated [so-called monopoly] market). Government/regulatory oversight, while necessary to some extent, in one way or another erects a barrier to entry. We musn't be Utopians on one side or the other.
Agreed ... relatively. My years covering the utility industry have taught that the regional relative monopolies do indeed make alternative entries difficult. Because of the nature of grid, "alternative technologies" are often not alternative delivery systems, which would provide true competition.

Broadband is not a strict utility though, as there is indeed more than one delivery method and it is not a necessary "commodity" yet.

In your regulated areas, someone had to pay the price; do they pay higher taxes? go with fewer services? or possibly could they be free-riding on the nonregulated areas? (I don't know, and I'm not saying I do.) I do know the cliché, "there's no free lunch."
Most areas are regulated in some capacity (as they have to be with a grid that involves both public and private ownership/services). Municipal customers generally pay slightly less, but that's because municipal utilities have far smaller areas to concentrate resources on (and aren't trying to profit), but conversely, private companies have more power to use their money to make money and invest in the grid.

Broadband is a relatively similar situation, but younger and with more opportunity for competition (particularly in service provision) with the right hand (see my above post for my opinion on the matter), not too heavy, but not too light and very careful to engage local governments, as opposed to the less efficient federal government (federal government having exclusive and final regulatory jurisdiction over things that are best left localized has caused problems in nearly every industry it has happened in).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988432 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 22:41:02 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988208 LegoPower77 :
said by morbo See Profile :

(it created an incentive to providers and the stock market players to manipulate prices as desired, under the guise of gaining free market efficiencies).
If you want to believe in conspiracies and such, fine. I can tell you, as a person who follows markets, prices oscillate back and forth for one reason or another. There's nothing we can do to stop the ebb and flow of things because as long as there are differences, conditions will always change.

The commodity markets actually reduce drastic price shocks because eeevil speculators are willing to take the risk of holding their wealth in a volatile good allowing the producer to have a stable business plan.

Regulation is not the panacea that will prevent people from having to confront costs (i.e., unlimited wants/limited resources). There's nothing about free markets that guarantees Always Low Prices. Always.© I don't know what the politicians out there said about deregulation; deregulation and free markets aren't the same thing. (Indeed, one cardinal requirement of free markets is contract enforcement, which naturally would require legal rules, i.e., regulation.)

All a common theme of my posts over the years is that we would, in most cases, have a superior outcome if we allowed the discovery process that entrepreneurs use to gain advantage be allowed to run it's natural course regardless of the structure of the market (even where there is a highly-concentrated [so-called monopoly] market). Government/regulatory oversight, while necessary to some extent, in one way or another erects a barrier to entry. We musn't be Utopians on one side or the other.

In your regulated areas, someone had to pay the price; do they pay higher taxes? go with fewer services? or possibly could they be free-riding on the nonregulated areas? (I don't know, and I'm not saying I do.) I do know the cliché, "there's no free lunch."

Cost implies choice, so be proud to be pro choice. :)

(Read how price gouging can be seen as good.)
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16988208 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 22:15:05 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16986514 KrK : Now that's a great reply.

I really can't add much to that at all. I've always believed the best policy would be have a private company that builds out the network, repairs it, upgrades it, and expands it, and charges people for access to the network, but they DO NOT provide any services themselves. IE they are an infrastructure company, and that is their job, and their income.

They charge all users equally, and allow the companies to choose what services/packages/entertainment they want to provide over the network, and consumers can pick and choose what services and packages they would wish to buy.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16986514 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 17:44:00 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16985704 morbo : if you want to get picky, then yes, deregulation didn't cause the price jump (it created an incentive to providers and the stock market players to manipulate prices as desired, under the guise of gaining free market efficiencies). however, it enabled the price jump. areas in texas that haven't deregulated (are still regulated) have not experienced that jump in prices. it's the same result for consumers: 20-30% more cost for the same electricity as before.

in the case of electricity, regulation has prevented all out gouging of consumers. no regulation = gouging.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16985704 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 15:17:26 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16985551 broadbander :
Can the government just arbitrarily set a price and have it be so?
Kind of, but if they do on a federal level, it will indeed be swallowed in debt and never accounted for with taxes, subsidies or bonds.

That is why such regulatory price functions are best left to local governments and the private industry together. Both have more direct finance accountability than the feds.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16985551 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:48:06 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16985519 LegoPower77 :
said by morbo See Profile :

add Texas to that list. since deregulation, 20-30% increases. unbelievable.
Dictionary.com defines "post hoc ergo propter hoc":

n : the logical fallacy of believing that temporal succession implies a causal relation

That is, literally, "after that therefore because of that."

Just because prices went up after deregulation doesn't mean the deregulation did it; it could have been the fact that NYMEX electricity (symbol JM) spiked first to 120 ¢/Mwh (Aug 05 and Dec 05) and then to above 140 ¢/Mwh (July 06). The average being between 60 ¢/Mwh and 80 ¢/Mwh.

Even with regulation, you can't have such an enormous price increase to an input and not have to raise rates.
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16985519 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:43:57 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16985399 LegoPower77 : I'm for prices reflecting reality. Regulation tends to mute the price function and therefor leads to waste.

In the case of electricity (and everything else for that matter), when people don't confront the full cost, they will waste it. Higher prices give incentive to conserve. High prices in a regulatory regime probably will not translate down to the consumer, but someone still has to pay for it. Can the government just arbitrarily set a price and have it be so?

If it's a choice between supply and demand, buyers and sellers setting the price or a politically-connected regulatory board setting them, I'll take the former even if that means high prices happen sometimes.
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16985399 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:18:32 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16984042 broadbander :
A mostly un-regulated pseudo monopoly (or duopoly) that acts in their best interests only and deliberately creates high barriers to viable competition AND lax oversight and control.
I agree that is, in short, what exists (though the situation is murkier in certain areas). But I wouldn't call it "the" third option, it is "a" third option as there are many other options on the table.

My feeling is that the best of those other options is a system in which the federal government ....

1. plans an initiative a la Kennedy (we will put a man on the moon, it will be done by X) and then

2. lays down incentives (in the form of taxes, special exemptions, free cat food, whatever did the trick in other countries) for private companies to spread broadband to places with less profitability (and for those incentives to kick in when the jobs done) in partnership with the local municipalities,

3. encourage local governments to facilitate their own broadband networks (by giving credits to local utilities who do so) with some legislation guiding the policy for such a network (i.e. what circumstances need to be present for it be allowed [perhaps 1 or less current ISPs serving in any one part of town with X speeds)] either solo (a la Lafayette) or in partnership with a private provider (a la Philly),

4. pass laws ensuring that state regulators do not have the power to wholesale stop local governments from providing broadband or partnering with third partners to provide broadband (leaving the power to ban broadband in a particular region solely up to the local government and/or federal government),

5. and last, but not least, open the lines to service provider competition.

As with other utility systems, the regional nature of broadband means that special emphasis must be put on local cooperation. Other countries have managed that without centralizing the whole thing. I think we can, too.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16984042 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 10:18:19 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16983079 KrK :
said by broadbander See Profile :

implemented on a local level, with support, but not intervention, from the federal body.
LOL. Ok, who's speaking with philosophical idealogy now. :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16983079 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 03:03:48 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982672 KrK : That may well be; But right now we've got the worst of both worlds. I think either:

1) You have a completely open free market with no barriers to competition entering the market, with a level playing field

or

2) You have a large monopoly player or incumbent that is tightly regulated and monitored for abuse, and pushed and prodded to do what is best for the nation (not just their own interests.)

I think either one of these solutions works the best.

However, what WE have is the bastard third option:

A mostly un-regulated pseudo monopoly (or duopoly) that acts in their best interests only and deliberately creates high barriers to viable competition AND lax oversight and control.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982672 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 02:34:51 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982932 broadbander :
said by KrK See Profile :

said by broadbander See Profile :

These are two extreme views neither of which works in utility or utility-like markets. The former is impossible because of physical limitations. The latter has little accountability and allow for massive loss or profit squander.
Read it again. #2 has never been tried properly. Note it says tight oversight and control. What's been tried is "lax oversight and control".

Many would argue that what we have NOW is the "solution between the two" and I'd intend to agree except it's the worst case scenario instead of the best of both worlds.
No, solution implies it works, which of course what we have doesn't. What we have isn't at all what I was referring to, so philosophically even if that is what some would argue is "between the two" its irrelevant to my point and my proposed solution. The solution is multifaceted. Not really "in the middle" but "a mixture" of the two notions, implemented on a local level, with support, but not intervention, from the federal body.

EDIT: As for number 2 ... it HAS been tried and the result IS almost always what I described. It "has never" been tried "completely," because it cannot be tried completely, just as communism will never "really" exist. Which highlights my point. Theoretical ideological ways of thinking do not equate to real world results in this industry, and most industries, and well, life in general. I stand by my statement: the solution is complex and particular and the situation should be dealt with as comparable countries are dealing with it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982932 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 02:01:45 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982905 KrK :
said by broadbander See Profile :

These are two extreme views neither of which works in utility or utility-like markets. The former is impossible because of physical limitations. The latter has little accountability and allow for massive loss or profit squander.
Read it again. #2 has never been tried properly. Note it says tight oversight and control. What's been tried is "lax oversight and control".

Many would argue that what we have NOW is the "solution between the two" and I'd intend to agree except it's the worst case scenerio instead of the best of both worlds.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982905 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 01:51:39 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982779 broadbander : 1) Impossibly, particularly in a utility market, with limited avenues of distribution.

2) This setup has never worked in the long run and actually, a federally-sanctioned telecommunications monopoly (as opposed to state and regional co-op and municipal providers) has a lot to do with the current crop of broadband problems/confusion.

These are two extreme views neither of which works in utility or utility-like markets. The former is impossible because of physical limitations. The latter has little accountability and allow for massive loss or profit squander.

The solution is between the two and has so much to do with the particular place and the particular service/provider. The best solutions are pragmatic partnerships, not grand ideological sweeps.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982779 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 01:14:25 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982679 KrK : That may well be; But right now we've got the worst of both worlds. I think either:

1) You have a completely open free market with no barriers to competition entering the market, with a level playing field

or

2) You have a large monopoly player or incumbent that is tightly regulated and monitored for abuse, and pushed and prodded to do what is best for the nation (not just their own interests.)

I think either one of these solutions works the best.

However, what WE have is the bastardized third option:

A mostly un-regulated pseudo monopoly (or duopoly) that acts in their best interests only and deliberately creates high barriers to viable competition AND lax oversight and control.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982679 Wed, 27 Sep 2006 00:48:38 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982447 alanhdsl : The retail price was capped, in repsonse to the assertion that deregulation would make prices cheaper. It was to force the providers to live up to this promise.

Enron and company forced up the price on the wholesale side and tried to force the state to break the caps. If that had been allowed, the retail price would have tripled. Instead, the evil regulators kept the caps and sent the Enron guys to jail. Notice that despite continuing growth and not much new generating capacity, California has not had nearly as many problems since the supply manipulation was stopped.

If the position is that higher retail prices are a good thing in exchange for reduced regulation, fine, make that point to the public. But be honest about it and state right up front that higher prices are your goal.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982447 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:59:14 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982366 morbo :
said by major marco See ProfileI mean, look how beneficial electricity deregulation has been for the State of California. Utils are practically free.
[/BQUOTE :

add Texas to that list. since deregulation, 20-30% increases. unbelievable.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16982366 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:46:39 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16981147 LegoPower77 : I agree, the FCC's embargo on the data is indefensible. But see my posts elsewhere in this thread about the problems with regulation.

I'm not saying no regulation at all is the best, but the very cronyism you point out from powell et al. is because of interventionist policies.

Electricity was never deregulated, I can't remember but it was either the wholesale or the retail price that remained fixed. I seem to recall it was wholesale but in any case price fixing is not a telltale sign of free markets and it created the type of profiteering that Enron did (separate from their funny accounting). If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd say California's leftist politicians sold a bunk bill of goods under the rubric of "deregulation" to solidify public consensus against it. It couldn't have worked better if planned.
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16981147 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:55:26 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16981057 LegoPower77 : As you can expect the contrast between perfect competition and monopoly is a continuum. (What were talking about mathematically is a horizontal curve or a vertical curve, respectively.) Perfectly competitive conditions do not exist anywhere except maybe in the futures markets (and neither do "perfect" monopoly conditions).

Second, as Nobel laureate Friedrich von Hayek says "Enthusiasm for perfect competition in theory and the support of monopoly in practice are indeed surprisingly often found to live together." People get caught up in trying to determine what's "fair" and bog the system down with Procrustean rules and operating procedures (which btw, benefit big companies by knocking high-cost producers, usually smaller firms, out).

There are four aspects in which government intervention is inferior to the free market:
    •Regulators are likely not to correctly judge the course the market might take if there were there no regulations.
    •Because regulators do not operate under the same set of incentives that businessmen do, regulatory decisions will not exploit opportunities waiting to be discovered.
    •Regulation may stifle the desirable discovery process generated by the market.
    •Regulation distorts the market by creating new undesirable opportunities and market processes that would not be relevant in an unregulated market.

--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16981057 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:43:09 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16981041 LegoPower77 : Yes I know about DARPA, I think that project has achieved its goals, no? I still fail to see how internet access for countryside towns would give us any military advantage since those guys use satellite communications and such just as easily.
said by PDXPLT See Profile :

The fact of the matter is that all aspects of our industrial infrastructure contribute to our defensive capabilities.
So we should nationalize all industry?
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16981041 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:40:44 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16981006 major marco :
said by LegoPower77 See Profile :

I doubt any of the data will show that deregulatory policies are not the best course of action.
Just like the last taxpayer financed FCC report that was suppressed from going public by former FCC Powell in order to protect his corporate buddies from evidence that their policies regarding locally owned stations produced more local news than those owned by media behemoths.

But I'm sure you're right, Lego. Trust the FCC. Deregulation is always best. Especially for the consumer. I mean, look how beneficial electricity deregulation has been for the State of California. Utils are practically free.
--
Choose Net Neutrality or Lose It
21st C TechnoBarons.
Why Care About Media?
IANYL:TINLA]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16981006 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:36:14 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16980765 PDXPLT :
said by LegoPower77 See Profile :

I don't know if the comparison with the interstate highway system is very accurate. For one thing, there is a valid argument that interstates promote national defense by allowing for quick movement of troops and equipment. It be hard to make that case for small town broadband access.
Not at all. Need I remind you that the internet's predecessor, Arpanet, was developed by the Defense Dep't?

In wartime, as in business, knowledge is power. And effective communications is key to spreading it.

The fact of the matter is that all aspects of our industrial infrastructure contribute to our defensive capabilities.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16980765 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:07:08 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16979586 broadbander :
This is pure socialist thinking dude.
How so? I admit there is a socialist bent in proposing some possible "federalization" of telecommunications systems, but furthering private-public partnership and creating an atmosphere in which private competition can thrive is not exactly socialist.

A standing army, law enforcement, education ... none of these things are in line with a "capitalist" framework. However, they are not only phenomena of socialisms and fascisms, but Democratic "capitalist" societies, too. There are so many examples of even the most hands-off governments in the world being involved with various affairs that calling any particular thing, other than wholesale nationalization of a specific industry, "socialist" doesn't tread water.

The reality is that we are expanding broadband, this is a very large country compared to other countries and the population densities varies to thousands an acre to 1 per couple hundred acres.
This is relatively true, but even countries of comparable size or comparable population density (a more relevant statistic) have spelled out initiatives and ambitious plans. Those that planned earlier have better penetration and (generally) more competitive environments. We are behind many countries, some with much more population density, some with relatively equivalent ones. However, without better vision, we will fall behind more comparable countries in short time.

There are going to be places left behind as not economically feasible part of life learn to deal with it.
Small government exists largely to ensure this is not the case when it comes to utilities. Utilities are PIVOTAL to growth and economic progress. If a municipality wants to continue to exist or wants to grow, it needs to ensure that important utilities are available in their borders. While this can drive debt in the short-term, it can attract new residents and businesses in the long-term. While not every municipality shares this view, there should be a way for those that do to pursue broadband, either in partnership with a private provider or on their own.

The government should not ever subsidize anything or utility.
Having studied and worked in the utility industry for about thirteen years, I can say your assertion is often correct, but like any ideological notion it does not always work. There are many examples of successful co-ops and locally run utility systems that, while perhaps no longer necessary, were pivotal in ensuring that everyday things we've come to expect like electricity and water were made available to everyone.

I consider myself a conservative and I generally agree that free markets are a good thing, but oversight is also an okay thing, and cooperation in the name of mutual interest is often the best.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16979586 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 17:17:03 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16979467 stevephl : This is pure socialist thinking dude. I know it is the in-thing these days to bash the US, whining and crying that we don't have more free or almost free benefits. The reality is that we are expanding broadband, this is a very large country compared to other countries and the population densities varies to thousands an acre to 1 per couple hundred acres. It is not nor has it ever been the role of government to regulate/run/operate broadband or any other service. People live with only dial or no Internet connection and do just fine. Let the industry do its thing they are going as fast as they can. There are going to be places left behind as not economically feasible part of life learn to deal with it. Businesses have a right to make a profit, owe reason to exist and any case we all benefit from those profits. No subsidizing of the Internet please want it? Pay for it then. The government should not ever subsidize anything or utility.

Living large in Colorado]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16979467 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:56:54 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16979395 LegoPower77 :
said by Matt See Profile :

I hate to think about where our country will be if we don't take control of a national broadband deployment out of the hands of private companies and enact a viable solution.
Scary thought.

I don't know if the comparison with the interstate highway system is very accurate. For one thing, there is a valid argument that interstates promote national defense by allowing for quick movement of troops and equipment. It be hard to make that case for small town broadband access.

Secondly, the interstate system, while funded by taxpayers, was built by private contractors.
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16979395 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:47:28 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978868 Matt :
said by LegoPower77 See Profile :

but at what cost?
You have a very valid point.

I wonder how many people said this when Eisenhower subsidized the interstate highway system? Back then, most people in traditionally "lower technology" areas probably thought the same thing most people today do about the current broadband available, "It's good enough for me, so it must be good enough for everyone else.", "I don't need any new roads, my two-lane twisty country road is fine.", "I don't see what you can do with 100Mbps that you can't do with 1.5Mbps", etc etc....

I wonder where our country would be without the interstate system?

I hate to think about where our country will be if we don't take control of a national broadband deployment out of the hands of private companies and enact a viable solution.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978868 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:26:51 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978863 nasadude :
said by LegoPower77 See Profile :

...

Regulations set into place what already exists and throw cold water on innovation by locking in a "rate of return" on investment and favoring incumbent firms. In other words, they are safe because they have the contract and so there is no need to innovate.
regulations can also open markets to new entrants when monopoly incumbents control those markets and prevent easy entry. That's the problem we have right now: most markets are at best controlled by two companies, the telco or the cableco; some markets are entirely controlled by only one of them (like where I live). The 1996 telecom act was supposed to open these markets, but it was never enforced like it should have been (big campaign contributions and telco stonewalling took care of that).

In these strange times we live in, where down is up and black is white, it is apparently very easy to convince politicians competition exists where there is none (the big campaign contributions help also). The FCC is simply playing it's role in this game. That's why people would like to see the raw data - they think the fix is in and the books are cooked (so do I).

I don't know if we need regulation or not; I do know we need competition. Right now, lack of competition is what is stifling innovation and keeping prices high and speeds low.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978863 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:26:24 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978645 broadbander :
Regulations set into place what already exists and throw cold water on innovation by locking in a "rate of return" on investment and favoring incumbent firms.
Bingo, but now a proactive policy (not necessarily a regulatory one) might be required to dismantle that framework/advantage.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978645 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:51:09 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978632 broadbander :
I doubt any of the data will show that deregulatory policies are not the best course of action. Sure we could wire every 300 person town with 100mbs, but at what cost? It's too bad the FCC has as much control as it does.
Broadband has hardly enough competitors for deregulatory matters to improve much at this point. Regulation of the industry during the 20th century helped set the regional monopoly stage now set.

I agree that the FCC, a federal body, has too much power in general, but I also think local authorities have too little leeway in forging their own networks. Whereas other countries with better penetration have introduced ambitious government directives, tax deals, and yes, even cross-subsidization plans for private and local government investment/partnership in broadband, and have, as such, expanded more rapidly available service and opened the market for provision competition, the U.S. has gone the opposite, staying largely mum on the subject and giving mixed regulatory signals. The courts have been even more bewildered, with ridiculous rulings both for and against local/state regulatory practices.

The U.S.'s broadband superiority has been falling rapidly in recent years and the current FCC's lack of vision has had a lot to do with it. An unwillingness to devote themselves to either side of the deregulation argument and an ambivalence about how to proactively promote partnership.

It will be lovely to see the data and formulate our own conclusions.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978632 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:49:19 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978413 LegoPower77 : I don't know, I'm not a technician, what is the definition of broadband? Is it a matter of preference; 200Kb is too slow? I use 768 at home because I'm willing to wait longer for pirated MP3s ;), if they had a 200k tier at a lower cost, I would consider it.

On point about regulation, there's a reason that most of the stuff is invented here. Regulations set into place what already exists and throw cold water on innovation by locking in a "rate of return" on investment and favoring incumbent firms. In other words, they are safe because they have the contract and so there is no need to innovate.
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978413 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:14:47 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978319 morbo :
all that matters is that the FCC releases the data for others to analyze.

why haven't they yet? they are hiding something...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16978319 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 13:58:38 EDT Re: Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16977997 nasadude : if the data is worth a damn, it will give an accurate picture of broadband in the U.S. Previous interpretations of the FCC data clearly do not do that, given the "zip code" and "200kbps" criteria they use.

From anecdotal and other evidence, my feeling is that broadband in the U.S. is in pretty bad shape, compared to the leaders in the developed world.

besides, we don't need the raw FCC data to show whether or not there needs to be regulation - examination of every single country that is ranked ahead of us in broadband shows some sort of regulatory scheme in place that is more rigorous than what we have.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16977997 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 13:04:11 EDT Will the data show regulation the way to go? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16977934 LegoPower77 : Should be interesting.

I doubt any of the data will show that deregulatory policies are not the best course of action. Sure we could wire every 300 person town with 100mbs, but at what cost? It's too bad the FCC has as much control as it does. I hope people can agree that having a regulatory board or agency opens the market up to political rent seeking. In other words, politicians and regulators act as self-interested individuals just as eeevil corporateers do in the private market. Certainly there is a function for government, but we musn't be Pollyannaish that there aren't costs when we use it.

My prediction is that this dubiously named "Center for Public Democracy" will not be any less biased in their analysis of the data than the FCC has supposedly been for their side. (For the record, I do think it sounds bogus to have 1 person mean it's a wired zip code.)
--
"It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally exposed to danger whether the government have too much or too little power."—James Madison
It's right, it's free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16977934 Tue, 26 Sep 2006 12:54:49 EDT