|
|
|
|
|
|
by paulhauggis
5166 days ago
|
|
|
or how about the fact that many people think that monopolies are bad, yet are fine with the government completely taking over things like health care, which would create a monopoly. The same rules will also apply (IE: no competition=no innovation). |
|
|
For example in France the state owned the electrical company and the telecom company for a long while.
Result?
- Single electrical network
- Single, full fiber, telecom network.
- Health care, even if not perfect, is way better than in the US.
Those work very well and are among the best in the world.
When mobile phones came to the game, they did not interfere in any way. Result?
- Each operator has a set of frequencies, successful operators have no bandwidth left (I'm sure you know of that issue in NYC, SF, and all big US cities if you're on AT&T. Same issue.)
- Deployment and coverage takes forever (again in the US it's the same, so many areas don't even have 3G or any cellular network at all) since not all zones are as profitable
- Same issue every time a new tech comes up (good luck til all the country is covered by LTE)
This concludes into: the state has to organize and regulate things for the good of the people (which actually also leads to faster innovation, see the fiber example again. France's full fiber network is in place since many decades!)
The problem is that no country really does even a little bit of that anymore. Every party is backed by corporations and sustain only their interests. The scheme is well oiled with several steps, and we aren't very different from the people in Europe from the 1700's (regardless of the country)