Net Neutrality
The fundamental problem is this: The network providers are already highly regulated. The result of that regulation has been to create a fairly small group of network providers, all of whom have monopolistic or oligopolistic power. The previous rules on Net Neutrality prevented network providers from using that power to extort money from content providers. Network providers were governed as “common carriers” just like telephone companies.
I can see that as definitely being a problem. Why did the government insist on regulating this environment in the first place?
Unless we’re willing to completely deregulate network providers, then we have to ensure that they can’t use their government-supported monopoly power to restrict competition. eliminating Net Neutrality, while at the same time allowing the network providers’ government-supported monopoly power to remain intact, would be a disaster for the Internet’s continued growth.
And this is where we really need to get to, deregulation of the industry (actually we need deregulation of all industries)
Eliminating net neutrality makes the network provider a gatekeeper for Internet content. Those who are unable or unwilling to pay the price demanded by the network providers simply won’t have the opportunity to use the Internet to provide their goods and services.
In a deregulated environment, this would eventually mean that new network providers would arise to compete with the rent-seeking providers. But the environment isn’t deregulated. Currently, however, the government itself—in addition to the high cost of entry in creating a network—creates a very high, oftem impossibly high, legal barrier to entry. This massively complicates the ability of rival network providers to enter the market and create alternatives to the rent-seekers.
Just so, and if we don keep Net Neutrality until the industry is deregulated, these chosen few companies will abuse whatever power they can get away with abusing. Someone explain to me why we need these legal barries of entry to entering any market.
Network Neutrality does not exist in a vacuum. It exists in a pre-existing regulatory paradigm that has to be considered when discussing it. Network providers make the argument “Don’t regulate the Internet!” But that is a deeply disingenuous position. What they don’t want regulated is their ability to seek rent. And that’s the only deregulation they are interested in.
Some have argued that if some network providers start to act in a discriminatory fashion, then others will step in and seek less rent, in order to attract more customers.No. They won’t.
First, for many network providers, there’s simply no reason for them to do so, since they don’t face a competitive environment. in most cases, if you live in an area where Cox Cable is your broadband provider, then your choice is pretty much limited to Cox, perhaps the local telephone company for DSL, and…nothing. Cox doesn’t have to worry about you looking for a competing network provider, because, for the most part, there isn’t one.
Second, there isn’t likely to be one, because the barrier to entry in the network provision market is so high. Positing that some mythical competitive environment will spring up is a pipe dream. It certainly didn’t happen after the cable industry deregulation in 1996. All that allowed was for the cable companies to compete with phone companies for phone and internet services, whil maintaining the bar against phone companies from creating rival cable services.
As a result, cable rates increased by 50%, while service levels declined, and consolidation—and less competition—occured in the cable industry.
You can’t apply free-market reasoning to a market that isn’t free. Market forces don’t provide solutions in markets where they aren’t allowed to operate,
To repeat, if we’re not willing to toss out the whole regulatory scheme that provides high—indeed, legally impermeable—barriers to entry, then eliminating Net Neutrality is simply a non-starter.
Now, would someone tell the government to get the fuck out of private industry.