Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Cellular Service in the US.

rated by 0 users
Answered (Verified) This post has 2 verified answers | 5 Replies | 3 Followers

Not Ranked
3 Posts
Points 40
Siyang posted on Wed, Aug 31 2011 6:57 PM

Recently, people have been calling for more regulations for cellular service. They say that AT&T and Verizon have both raised prices, which are already high by European standards (e.g. texting costs 25cents per text for very little data) and there is very little competition (and more companies like T-Mobile are dropping out instead of entering). How should I respond to that?

  • | Post Points: 20

Answered (Verified) Verified Answer

Top 10 Contributor
Male
5,118 Posts
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator
Verified by Siyang

John James:

"For any geek still concerned about a possible reemergence of the old Ma Bell monopoly, it is important to remember that it was government that created the monopoly in the first place."

What gets me are the statists calling for national (government funded) broadband; after all, the government prohibited competitors from installing "redundant" cables.

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 20

All Replies

Top 10 Contributor
Male
4,987 Posts
Points 89,490

No one is naturally entitled to any technology.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
5,118 Posts
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator
Verified by Siyang

John James:

"For any geek still concerned about a possible reemergence of the old Ma Bell monopoly, it is important to remember that it was government that created the monopoly in the first place."

What gets me are the statists calling for national (government funded) broadband; after all, the government prohibited competitors from installing "redundant" cables.

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
3 Posts
Points 40
Siyang replied on Thu, Sep 1 2011 12:42 AM

Wait, are you saying that there is a regulation against companies from installing cables if there are already some cables?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
5,118 Posts
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

From the Wiki:

Also, potential competitors were forbidden from installing new lines to compete, with state governments wishing to avoid "duplication." The claim was that telephone service was a "natural monopoly," meaning that one firm could better serve the public than two or more. Eventually, AT&T's market share amounted to what most would regard as a monopolistic share.

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (6 items) | RSS