There is no such "thing" as a free or freed market. It's a concept. There are markets *more free* or *less free* than other markets (broadband industry is a case in point here), but no such thing as a genuinely free market. There COULD be freed markets if government were abolished, but since it is not, all currently existing markets are to some degree controlled.
The problem is that a lot of people think that our current society is half-and-half "free markets" and necessary government regulation. That's not possible. The "free markets" of today are highly controlled, corrupt, crony industries.
This was what they wanted all along. It's a shame they don't drop the pretense of being for safety and justice - everyone would see them for the bullies they are.
"The state works with monopolistic private producers to inhibit innovation and stop the progress of technology, while using coercion against possible competitors and against consumers. Even U.S. foreign policy is profoundly affected by widespread confusions over what is legitimate and merely asserted as property. What Kinsella is calling for instead of this cartelizing system is nothing more or less than a pure free market, which he argues would not generate anything resembling what we call intellectual property today. IP, he argues, is really a state-enforce legal convention, not an extension of real ownership."
Since my econ days in undergraduate, we all knew GDP was faulty and almost useless as a real measure of productive economic activity. It suffers from the methodological problems of ALL indices (which is the fact that the objects to which they refer are constantly changing - an automobile sold in 1954 is not an automobile being sold today).
Beyond this, what it calculates is totally incomplete. Hiring a housemaid to wash the dishes is counted in GDP, but asking your wife to do the same is not.
Governments cannot induce innovation. Any attempt to force companies to offer what government bureaucrats think consumers want is going to always be met with evasion - this is natural, and frankly, a good thing in almost all industries. The businesses themselves need to be the ones to compete on innovation, and when there is market pressure for it, they will do so.
That said, the telco and cable industry is very corporatist, very regulated, and they have essentially purchased all the right people to make sure they can maintain their illegitimate monopoly (like how AT&T wrote the regulation in various US states). This is creeping fascism; the State should not have nearly as much control and "oversight" as they do in the cable/internet provider industry. They've more or less become like public utilities which have no interest in innovating and are rife with inefficiency. So while I cannot endorse any government passing laws to force companies to better their products, I can't help but imagine the counterfactual scenario we could be enjoying if the telco/cable industry weren't dominated by stifling laws and anti-trust regulation.
It's difficult to determine in any case whether politicians are stupid or evil. The principle of charity requires us to assume the most charitable interpretation of any given position and, to that end, I applaud your conviction that they are simply misinformed. I am not so sure.
Your observation that increased regulation will end up benefiting entrenched players is correct. What is incorrect, however, is to presume this is an unintended consequence of overzealous regulators who end up accomplishing the opposite of what they want.
This is regulatory capture, plain and simple, and it operates in every industry that is enslaved by bureaucrats: pharmaceutical, media/entertainment, basically every sector of the economy is led by a few large firms who have successfully campaigned for more regulation to drown their competition (one reason WalMart supported the Affordable Care Act). It's political entrepreneurship, rent-seeking, whatever you want to call it, and it undermines free trade and the free expression of ideas that we have come to appreciate so much on the internet.
If it's undesirable to be in law enforcement because you will be held to the same standards as every one else in society, there is obviously something very wrong with law enforcement.
On the post: Former FCC Boss Turned Top Cable Lobbyist Says Cable Industry Being Unfairly Attacked, 'No Evidence' Of Consumer Harm
Love this line
Great way to phrase it
On the post: Optometrists Push For State Laws Blocking Online Eye Exams
Re: Re:
The problem is that a lot of people think that our current society is half-and-half "free markets" and necessary government regulation. That's not possible. The "free markets" of today are highly controlled, corrupt, crony industries.
On the post: Apparently Hacking Syed Farook's iPhone Accomplished Nothing (Other Than Making Everyone Less Safe)
No Surprise
On the post: Law Enforcement Raids Another Tor Exit Node Because It Still Believes An IP Address Is A Person
Re: Re: Improper raids aren't a bug, they're a feature....
On the post: Our Comment On DMCA Takedowns: Let's Return To First Principles (And The First Amendment)
On the Idea of First Principles
"The state works with monopolistic private producers to inhibit innovation and stop the progress of technology, while using coercion against possible competitors and against consumers. Even U.S. foreign policy is profoundly affected by widespread confusions over what is legitimate and merely asserted as property. What Kinsella is calling for instead of this cartelizing system is nothing more or less than a pure free market, which he argues would not generate anything resembling what we call intellectual property today. IP, he argues, is really a state-enforce legal convention, not an extension of real ownership."
On the post: Techdirt Reading List: GDP: A Brief But Affectionate History
Re:
On the post: Techdirt Reading List: GDP: A Brief But Affectionate History
Beyond this, what it calculates is totally incomplete. Hiring a housemaid to wash the dishes is counted in GDP, but asking your wife to do the same is not.
On the post: Canadian Cable Companies Make A Mockery Of Government's Push For Cheaper TV
That said, the telco and cable industry is very corporatist, very regulated, and they have essentially purchased all the right people to make sure they can maintain their illegitimate monopoly (like how AT&T wrote the regulation in various US states). This is creeping fascism; the State should not have nearly as much control and "oversight" as they do in the cable/internet provider industry. They've more or less become like public utilities which have no interest in innovating and are rife with inefficiency. So while I cannot endorse any government passing laws to force companies to better their products, I can't help but imagine the counterfactual scenario we could be enjoying if the telco/cable industry weren't dominated by stifling laws and anti-trust regulation.
http://www.businessinsider.com/historical-price-trends-for-tech-products-2015-10
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest its government regulation that explains the chart in the above article.
On the post: Join Internet Startups In Telling The EU Not To Mess Up The Internet
Re: Re: Working as intended
On the post: Join Internet Startups In Telling The EU Not To Mess Up The Internet
Working as intended
Your observation that increased regulation will end up benefiting entrenched players is correct. What is incorrect, however, is to presume this is an unintended consequence of overzealous regulators who end up accomplishing the opposite of what they want.
This is regulatory capture, plain and simple, and it operates in every industry that is enslaved by bureaucrats: pharmaceutical, media/entertainment, basically every sector of the economy is led by a few large firms who have successfully campaigned for more regulation to drown their competition (one reason WalMart supported the Affordable Care Act). It's political entrepreneurship, rent-seeking, whatever you want to call it, and it undermines free trade and the free expression of ideas that we have come to appreciate so much on the internet.
On the post: Techdirt Reading List: Crypto: How The Code Rebels Beat The Government Saving Privacy In The Digital Age
Re: Another book of interest
On the post: Two Former Cops Lead Legislative Charge To Shield Body Camera Footage From Public Inspection
Re: Re: Easy way to fix this
Next >>