dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
40
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to LastDon

Premium Member

to LastDon

Re: "Liberals First Out With Their Digital Economy Strategy

said by LastDon:

said by pegcitynet:

6.Support for an Open Internet. This principle reaffirms the party's position net neutrality and support for review of the usage based billing issue.

just a review..?

I'm meeting with Garneau in about a week to discuss this.
I will be making very strong representations for affordable, broadly available, neutral, consumer-friendly rules, with an accountable CRTC (or separate Internet-only oversight agency) with engineers/scientists as commissioners, and audit powers with penalties for false representations to the CRTC.
jfmezei
Premium Member
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC

jfmezei

Premium Member

Maynard, it is "affordable internet" that will work. You need to hammer in the point that last mile will necver be competitive (with some localised exceptions) and that there need to be strong regulation to ensure that last mile is accessible and affordable for small ISPs, which will in turn allow real competition at the retail ISP level, and that will drive prices down.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

Trust me, that will be LARGE in my discussion with him.
LastDon
join:2002-08-13

LastDon

Member

said by MaynardKrebs:

Trust me, that will be LARGE in my discussion with him.

Maynard can we join you? lol

this is ridiculous,

and a gimmick, they even made a UBB page and cried to collect signatures and to fill their petition and they turn around and not even mention it.

UBB will sway my vote in a large way.

I rely on the internet for a lot of things in my life.
jfmezei
Premium Member
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC

jfmezei

Premium Member

Suggest you take a look at:

»openmedia.ca/ElectionStrategy
nauru0
join:2011-02-02

nauru0 to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

said by LastDon:

said by pegcitynet:

6.Support for an Open Internet. This principle reaffirms the party's position net neutrality and support for review of the usage based billing issue.

just a review..?

I'm meeting with Garneau in about a week to discuss this.
I will be making very strong representations for affordable, broadly available, neutral, consumer-friendly rules, with an accountable CRTC (or separate Internet-only oversight agency) with engineers/scientists as commissioners, and audit powers with penalties for false representations to the CRTC.

Wouldn't microeconomists be the priority to have on the commission, since this is essentially an issue of market structure, efficient provision of a public good such as last mile infrastructure, competitive dynamics, market power and concentration, and limiting the potential for anticompetitive/collusive/cartel behaviour among firms in the industry.

Sure they would probably want some engineers there as well to consult on technical issues as they arise, but fundamentally the goal should probably be to design a market which fosters extremely high levels of competition (consumers in most regions of the country having ideally more than 25 viable options for internet service, and mandated near-zero barriers to switching to a better priced or more advanced provider), and which forces constant innovation due to persistent threat of bankruptcy if falling even slightly behind on price or technology. There is also ongoing challenge of maintaining cut-throat competitiveness in the internet service market, and preventing market power from becoming in any way concentrated.

These are in my view primarily microeconomic challenges, not so much scientific/technological ones.

Given the CRTC's apparent responsibility for market design, I'm surprised they thought it would be a good idea to put a lawyer in charge of the commission rather than someone who actually has an extensive background in micro theory. No offense to Michael Geist, who is probably an exception in that he might make a pretty good CRTC chairman despite his lack of econ background (due to his innate intelligence and demonstrated willingness to educate himself on complex issues and key terminology rather than making/defending idiotic statements/policy in front of the whole country a la KvF).
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

said by nauru0:

Wouldn't microeconomists be the priority to have on the commission, since this is essentially an issue of market structure, efficient provision of a public good such as last mile infrastructure, competitive dynamics, market power and concentration, and limiting the potential for anticompetitive/collusive/cartel behaviour among firms in the industry.

Which sort of economist do you want?

- a Milton Friedman/Alan Greenspan - of the sort that wants corporations walk all over citizens, that the 'market' is self-correcting?

- a John Maynard Keynes - who understands that corporations aret is only interested in themselves and will conspire & collude to every end every chance they get?

- a Stevie Harlper type economist - who pays lipservice to citizens rights and needs but does the opposite?

All you really need is a sound policy and the determination to stick to it. The rest is technical details and framing the decisions in language that is factually, legally, and semantically correct. Staff lawyers can assist in that, but don't count on a lawyer (artsie) to know when they are being snowed technically by an incumbent.
kyle747
join:2008-04-09
Orleans, ON

kyle747

Member

After reading the Liberal statement anyone should be able to see it's purely a fluff piece. Committing to 1.5 Mbps is essentially saying "we will do nothing to compete with other industrial countries "
Korea and Australia are committing to drastically faster internet speeds, most of Europe already has them. They also commit to "digital literacy" but I don't see them supporting things like open-source textbooks or other open source software. Sounds like a plan to throw money at liberal "consultants."

They support "net neutrality" but fail to define exactly what they mean. If they meant equality for all types of traffic you can be damn sure they'd say so and get on the government over it.

It's essentially a series of promises they can break by re-defining the context or definition.

While I won't say that the current Gov will be any better we at least have Clement who understands the issues and has made an unequivocal statement supporting the smaller ISP's and saying he will not allow UBB.

I'll be interested to read the conservative strategy. If they unequivocally state they will not allow UBB then they get my vote. Pretty much as simple as that.
jfmezei
Premium Member
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC

jfmezei

Premium Member

While I agree that the Liberal's piece is "fluff", I disagree that Clement really knows his stuff.

yes, he spoke well, but he could do that because he knew he would never have to act on his promises. (since he knew Bell would widthdraw UBB tariffs).

His aides knew the stuff and were able to brief him on eaxctly what to say to please us.

But also be aware that Clement had limits on what he could say because there are those within his Reform party which fully agreed that the CRTC's UBB decisions were 100% correct and must not be overturned.

In a party with strong leadership (kind way of saying "dictatorial"), there are limits to what ministers can and cannot say unless authorized by the PMO.

In the case of the liberals, it is somewhat of an opposite, with MPs trying to get the leader on board, but the leader doesn't really know what to do.
kyle747
join:2008-04-09
Orleans, ON

kyle747

Member

said by jfmezei:

While I agree that the Liberal's piece is "fluff", I disagree that Clement really knows his stuff.

yes, he spoke well, but he could do that because he knew he would never have to act on his promises. (since he knew Bell would widthdraw UBB tariffs).

His aides knew the stuff and were able to brief him on eaxctly what to say to please us.

But also be aware that Clement had limits on what he could say because there are those within his Reform party which fully agreed that the CRTC's UBB decisions were 100% correct and must not be overturned.

In a party with strong leadership (kind way of saying "dictatorial"), there are limits to what ministers can and cannot say unless authorized by the PMO.

In the case of the liberals, it is somewhat of an opposite, with MPs trying to get the leader on board, but the leader doesn't really know what to do.

When you say things like that you reveal a built in bias. I confess to having a bias against the liberals, but I don't call them Marxist-Leninists
pegcitynet
join:2009-09-02

pegcitynet

Member

said by kyle747 See Profile
I confess to having a bias against the liberals, but I don't call them Marxist-Leninists

Good, if you did, you would be lying. However, there is nothing untrue about what jfmezei said.

The way Harper runs the PMO there is no way that he did not know about the fact that his #1 advisor, nicknamed "the mechanic", (allegedly because he could 'fix things'), was a convicted fraudster.

These Conservatives are dirty. They will pretend to be anti-UBB pre-election, then if they win a majority, there will no longer have an objection to it. It will be Income Trusts all over again.

As long as you folks who support the party realize that they will not push against UBB unless they remain in the minority of power.

nauru0
join:2011-02-02

nauru0 to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

said by nauru0:

Wouldn't microeconomists be the priority to have on the commission, since this is essentially an issue of market structure, efficient provision of a public good such as last mile infrastructure, competitive dynamics, market power and concentration, and limiting the potential for anticompetitive/collusive/cartel behaviour among firms in the industry.

Which sort of economist do you want?

- a Milton Friedman/Alan Greenspan - of the sort that wants corporations walk all over citizens, that the 'market' is self-correcting?

- a John Maynard Keynes - who understands that corporations aret is only interested in themselves and will conspire & collude to every end every chance they get?

- a Stevie Harlper type economist - who pays lipservice to citizens rights and needs but does the opposite?

All you really need is a sound policy and the determination to stick to it. The rest is technical details and framing the decisions in language that is factually, legally, and semantically correct. Staff lawyers can assist in that, but don't count on a lawyer (artsie) to know when they are being snowed technically by an incumbent.

You've just named three macroeconomists. Micro is very different, and much less politically charged as well.

"All you need is a sound policy and the determination to stick to it." Yes, coming up with a sound policy rooted in the reality of how firms behave is what microeconomists are generally good for. All those journal articles on game theory, market design, experimental economics and industrial organisation are --in a perfect world-- used to formulate actual policy. And these areas of micro are about as technical as the engineering fields you've mentioned.

The point is you need both. Microeconomists to design and maintain a policy which results in the desired market structure and competitive dynamics, and engineers to ensure that incumbents don't get away with spouting BS when they claim amendments are needed.

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

Davesnothere to jfmezei

Premium Member

to jfmezei
said by jfmezei:

While I agree that the Liberal's piece is "fluff", I disagree that Clement really knows his stuff.

Yes, he spoke well, but he could do that because he knew he would never have to act on his promises. (since he knew Bell would widthdraw UBB tariffs).

His aides knew the stuff and were able to brief him on eaxctly what to say to please us.

But also be aware that Clement had limits on what he could say because there are those within his Reform party which fully agreed that the CRTC's UBB decisions were 100% correct and must not be overturned.

In a party with strong leadership (kind way of saying "dictatorial"), there are limits to what ministers can and cannot say unless authorized by the PMO.

In the case of the liberals, it is somewhat of an opposite, with MPs trying to get the leader on board, but the leader doesn't really know what to do.

.
IMNSHO :

The Liberal statement shows a typical broad position favouring our concerns, but leaves the barn door wide open for them to abandon it if they wish.

Clement may personally believe some of the things he has said in our support, but as you mentioned, he had the inside track to know not only what BHell might next do, but also to the likelihood of a spring election (which he surely knew that Harpler would try to manipulate the opposition into forcing), in which case he would lose his Industry Ministry portfilio either due to a cabinet shuffle, or (worst case) due to defeat of the government.

And Harpler pulls his strings too much of the time.

Your polite way of labelling Harpler as a dictator type micromanager, well, I gotta say I concur, and he needs to go.

The smaller political parties as usual can speak their minds moreso, as they are very unlikely to have to back up what they say, though in a balance of power scenario they do sometimes manage to wield some real influence.
jfmezei
Premium Member
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC

jfmezei to nauru0

Premium Member

to nauru0
it doesn't take a Friedman/Keynes or Marx to decide that access to internet has become essential. And it doesn't tale a Friedman/Keynes or Marx to realise that there is a problem with lack of competition in Canada.

It take a government with a willingness to irritate incumbents in order to give Canada a morew competitive environment that will eventually drive prices down.

Everyone knows it needs to be done, but no politician has the guts to get it done.

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

1 edit

Davesnothere

Premium Member

said by jfmezei:

....It takes a government with a willingness to irritate incumbents in order to give Canada a more competitive environment that will eventually drive prices down.

Everyone knows it needs to be done, but no politician has the guts to get it done.

.
+1 GB to that !

What else is there to say ?!

Except ''So JF, which riding will YOU be representing ?''

friendlyguy
@teksavvy.com

friendlyguy to jfmezei

Anon

to jfmezei
So who has access to a high paid lobbyist?
»thechronicleherald.ca/Ca ··· 981.html

Seems like the only way to get access to the PMO. We'll just need a couple billion dollars and some friends in high places.

This is the reason we have no help on this file. We have no money. and the money we do have they get it no matter what.

EUS
Kill cancer
Premium Member
join:2002-09-10
canada

EUS to jfmezei

Premium Member

to jfmezei
+2 GIGASHMURTZ!
Neozonz
join:2010-06-11
North York, ON

Neozonz to friendlyguy

Member

to friendlyguy
said by friendlyguy :

So who has access to a high paid lobbyist?
»thechronicleherald.ca/Ca ··· 981.html

Seems like the only way to get access to the PMO. We'll just need a couple billion dollars and some friends in high places.

This is the reason we have no help on this file. We have no money. and the money we do have they get it no matter what.

Donate to openmedia

but in the end we're openmedia is running on chump change so... we gonna get screwed.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to Davesnothere

Premium Member

to Davesnothere
said by Davesnothere:

said by jfmezei:

....It takes a government with a willingness to irritate incumbents in order to give Canada a more competitive environment that will eventually drive prices down.

Everyone knows it needs to be done, but no politician has the guts to get it done.

.
+1 GB to that !

What else is there to say ?!

Except ''So JF, which riding will YOU be representing ?''

JF is going to be representing his own 'riding' as the Minister of Cycling.
Vomio
join:2008-04-01

Vomio

Member

said by MaynardKrebs:

JF is going to be representing his own 'riding' as the Minister of Cycling.

IMHO bicycle riding should be a prerequisite of becoming an MP!
It would get them out near the people and reduce Parliamentary obesity.

Maybe rickshaws instead of limos for dignitaries.
RCMP bodyguards on Raleigh DL-1s.

The money saved could help finance Canadian internet connectivity.
jfmezei
Premium Member
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC

jfmezei

Premium Member

corporations need lobby because they run against pubic opinion.

openmedia can get public opinion to influence minister via a lot of media noise. What that doesn't give you however is back door access to private meetings where you plan strategy (as was the case with Clement getting Bell to widthdraw UBB and replace it with something that fitted his rethoric.)

Note that individuals and non profit organisations do not need to register as lobby groups.