Author Topic: Net neutrality shenanigins are happening.  (Read 26397 times)

It's title 2 regulations. Same reason where there are so few utilities companies. Remove the regulations. Free up competition. Not a hard concept.
Do you realize how difficult/expensive it is for a new ISP to come in? And what incentive is there for a new ISP if the area isn't very densely populated and another ISP already has a monopoly there? Your argument is like communism; it's a good idea in theory but doesn't actually work in the real world.


First Net Neutrality, Then It'll Be Bread Lines

so how come competition was no more present before these regulations mr. economist

We have monopolies because they were successful...

Do you realize how difficult/expensive it is for a new ISP to come in? And what incentive is there for a new ISP if the area isn't very densely populated and another ISP already has a monopoly there? Your argument is like communism; it's a good idea in theory but doesn't actually work in the real world.

No my idea is like capitalism because that's literally how capitalism loving works. Undercut and offer better/different service.

ITT corderlain displays his gross lack of understanding in economics and natural monopolies

No my idea is like capitalism because that's literally how capitalism loving works.

You don't know how capitalism works

fun fact: most large ISPs have deals with cities that only allow one or two different ISPs this has been happening longer than NN has been in effect and repealing it is not going to change that.

anyone who actually thinks internet companies have ever had an incentive to engage in market competition is a braindead moron.
they by nature can't compete because they almost never operate in the same area together. they control the internet lines in their areas.

You don't know how capitalism works

Supply and demand. Supply bad ISP. People demand better ISP. Another company offers a better ISP and therefore prospers. It's like the core principle of capitalism.

Supply and demand. Supply bad ISP. People demand better ISP. Another company offers a better ISP and therefore prospers. It's like the core principle of capitalism.
Supply and demand does NOT apply to natural monopolies you loving moron.
Another company is not going to offer another ISP just because the people don't like the one they have. People have no choice but to use the bad one.
The internet companies will (as they have done since they first existed) mutually agree not to compete so they can all price gouge their "customers".

Supply and demand. Supply bad ISP. People demand better ISP. Another company offers a better ISP and therefore prospers. It's like the core principle of capitalism.
did you not read anything in the past 2 pages?

the ISP market is a natural monopoly, reinforced by actual collusion
another company cannot simply "offer a better ISP"

loving Google tried to do it, offering a legitimately better service than most (fiber optic connection for cheap), and they still had trouble getting into the markets

you're deluded if you think that the ISP market is capitalism working as intended, and even more deluded if you think repealing net neutrality will magically fix it

The ability to regulate monopolies (or corporations in general) for the preservation of public good is written into the constitution (the Commerce Clause specifically). If you are actually trying to defend the right for people to form trusts/monopolies that serve no greater purpose than maximally boning the public to almost no one's benefit, you're a loving retard.

Supply and demand. Supply bad ISP. People demand better ISP. Another company offers a better ISP and therefore prospers. It's like the core principle of capitalism.
Literally 100% bullstuff. What you wrote is a completely bullstuff falsity that we literally disproved in my introductory economics class in college.

Monopolies do not have supply curves. They are price-setters, not price-takers. What this means is they'll always charge their profit-maximizing price at the cost of all consumer surplus. This, regardless of which school of economics you subscribe to, is a bad thing.

Another company can't offer a better ISP if nobody is willing to fork over literally billions of dollars in capital to set up the cable and infrastructure to run one.

Supply and demand. Supply bad ISP. People demand better ISP. Another company offers a better ISP and therefore prospers. It's like the core principle of capitalism.

Okay economics genius, how the hell can another company offer a better ISP if google can't even break into the market?

The ISP market is actually more akin to real-world communism than capitalism.
In real-world communism a one-party dictatorship controls everything and can do whatever they want with their populace and the populace has no choice.
In the ISP markets, an ISP controls one huge area of internet lines and can do whatever they want with their "customers" and the customers have no choice.

Monopolies do not have supply curves. They are price-setters, not price-takers. What this means is they'll always charge their profit-maximizing price at the cost of all consumer surplus. This, regardless of which school of economics you subscribe to, is a bad thing.
I can think of one school of economics that thinks it's a good thing

The ISP market is actually more akin to real-world communism than capitalism.
In real-world communism a one-party dictatorship controls everything and can do whatever they want with their populace and the populace has no choice.
In the ISP markets, an ISP controls one huge area of internet lines and can do whatever they want with their "customers" and the customers have no choice.
i'm going to be pedantic and point out that not all communist ideologies are supportive of dictatorship
stalinism, maoism, and leninism are, but there's also other variants that are not
but yeah close enough
« Last Edit: December 14, 2017, 10:39:11 PM by TristanLuigi »