|
|
 Originally Posted by wufwugy
Sorry for so long of posts. I wanted to address specific things. I hope there is sense to be made in them.
Causality is backwards. The demand for private imprisonment is created by the government. There is no profit in imprisonment whatsoever except that government, through its shitty laws, create a large supply of convicts that it is unable to house. This creates the demand for housing of convicts, for which the private sector vies for contracts.
Sadly, it doesn't work. We'd have to get into rules of supply, demand, and moral hazards to see why "health and safety" policies make things worse for health and safety.
This is caused by #3. The moral hazards created by things like the FDIC are exactly why "too big to fail" exists. On the surface, mandates like your #3 appear reasonable, benign, and beneficial, but they're truly anything but. What we want to do is avoid more #5s by not creating more #3s.
While it is not a good thing that companies can lobby governments for special treatment in the broadband field, it is also not a good thing to have net neutrality -- where the government monopolizes policy areas of the internet. It should be noted that the primary culprits for special treatment in the broadband arena are not companies, but are instead unions and municipal residents. Comcast and Time Warner have not been able to get nearly as much special treatment as those two groups. This is why the only competition growth in the field we see is in areas where unions and municipalities have not created too many laws against laying new line.
The last thing we want is net neutrality. The FCC fucked up radio and fucked up TV, and it will fuck up the internet in some form or another. The better option is deregulation in the vein that allows competitors to grow. Google Fiber is doing everything it can, but it is stymied exclusively by one thing: regulations. Apple would probably enter the field if regulations were lower too. There are several other broadband companies that would likely expand too.
Exactly like how the food industry is amazing because regulations are extremely low, which promotes competition, broadband would also be if regulations were low.
Nordic countries are heavily subsidized by capitalism in the West. If taxes were a necessary evil, it would be true that taxes and subsequent regulations on anything (yes anything) is also a necessary evil. But we know that's not the case, as we see that even in the most complex of fields, where the government doesn't do much, prosperity is incredible. Likewise, where we see lots of government involvement, no matter how simple the field is, it's an utter disaster
It isn't that money is needed to run things therefore taxes must be collected, but that profits are needed in order to run things sustainably. Government doesn't create profits and everything it runs sucks. If we exit the pro-state lefty bubble, we see this. For example, Europe is a terrible, terrible analogy to use for why government works. But for some damn reason, we never ever hear about this. We never hear about the shitass high structural unemployment, we never hear about horrible business environment created by distorted incentives from regulatory and welfare policies. We never hear about them because the media is made up of a bunch of pro-statists who view Europe with rosy glasses.
Most economists point to political policies for why unemployment is so much higher in Europe than US, yet journalists won't touch it, because, well, economics is hard and journalism is not
John Oliver is a great guy, but he has a lot of things backwards. When we talk about physics, we ask physicists. But apparently when we talk economics, a comedy actor's voice is as good as anybody's.
I can't address you point for point que because ftr is not particularly mobile friendly, and that will then become an exercise in frustration for me.
But point 6: are you saying that fcc commissioner mignon Clyburn has no idea what she's doing?
Relevant link: http://arstechnica.com/business/2015...-and-title-ii/
Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, the longest-tenured commissioner,{spam link}who supported Title II five years ago, said the net neutrality order does not address only theoretical harms.
"This is more than a theoretical{spam link}exercise," she said. "Providers here in the United States have, in fact, blocked{spam link}applications on mobile devices,{spam link}which not only hampers free{spam link}expression, it also restricts{spam link}innovation by allowing{spam link}companies, not the consumer, to{spam link}pick winners and losers."
Clyburn convinced Chairman Tom Wheeler to remove language that she believed{spam link}was problematic.
|
Reply With Quote
