[mavrc]

> The 'say' you have in government is much smaller than the 'say' you have in using Uber. I can choose not to use Uber any time I please.

True.

I have effectively no choice in ISP, and no choice in power company. At what point do I get to vote on seats on my ISP's board, or my power company's?

[modeless]

Guess why you have no choice in ISP or power company? Because the government deliberately regulates those markets to reduce competition, often to the monopoly level. But they don't give you any compensation for that, such as a say in how the companies are run.

This is the root cause of many problems in other markets too. High pharmaceutical prices? The government granted monopolies (patents) to those companies. Forced to use Windows? Microsoft has a government-granted monopoly (copyright) on Windows. Strange that limiting or revoking these state-granted monopoly rights is never considered as an option for remedying these problems.

More relevant to this article, the government has historically put drastic limits on the number of taxis that can operate in a city, to the point where the permits required to operate one were once worth over a million dollars apiece. The need to disrupt that system is why Uber developed a culture of law-breaking to begin with.

[darawk]

That's quite different. ISPs are regulated in a special way because they are monopolies. Monopolies occupy a middle ground between government and company. A business monopoly is like a mild/weak form of government.

[magila]

You chose indirectly when you voted for the city counselors who granted franchise agreements to your ISP and power company.

[hammock]

When you buy shares