Tuesday, March 19, 2002
Consumers groups opposing the lifting of open access rules on cable and DSL providers must be wearing blindfolds. That, at least, is the conclusion one draws from plans to sue to prevent the FCC from removing these restrictions. South Korea is now one of the most connected countries in the world, with 51% of the population having internet access in the home. Of that total, 57% have broadband internet access. Compare that to America, which manages a mere 13%.
America is doing something wrong. While economic regulators fiddle with the issue of ensuring future market competition, other countries are letting the market make its own decisions. You don't CREATE market competition. It just happens. Markets may or may not decide to concentrate itself in the hands of a small number of suppliers. If it does, however, it does so because CONSUMERS decided to make it so. Consumers are smarter than goverment give them credit for.
The FCC has decided that its attempt at centrally planned market competition doesn't work. They appear to recognize that ISPs need to have some assurance of a return on their investment before making the decision to upgrade their cable or telephone lines. Open access removes the profit incentive for DSL and cable providers.
This consumer doesn't want the "consumer advocates'" help. If I'm free to buy from whomever I want, suppliers should be free to supply product however they want.
America is doing something wrong. While economic regulators fiddle with the issue of ensuring future market competition, other countries are letting the market make its own decisions. You don't CREATE market competition. It just happens. Markets may or may not decide to concentrate itself in the hands of a small number of suppliers. If it does, however, it does so because CONSUMERS decided to make it so. Consumers are smarter than goverment give them credit for.
The FCC has decided that its attempt at centrally planned market competition doesn't work. They appear to recognize that ISPs need to have some assurance of a return on their investment before making the decision to upgrade their cable or telephone lines. Open access removes the profit incentive for DSL and cable providers.
This consumer doesn't want the "consumer advocates'" help. If I'm free to buy from whomever I want, suppliers should be free to supply product however they want.
NTT DoCoMo has done it again. While the rest of the world dreams of 3G (broadband wireless) becoming reality sometime in the next 2 to 3 years, NTT DoCoMo is rolling it out all across Japan. Now they're thinking about the NEXT big thing, 4G, which according to the referenced article, "would allow downloads at more than 100 megabits per second." That's about 66 time the speed of DSL. If it becomes a reality, it might prove a competitor to wired alternatives.
As I've pointed out in the past and will point out again, NTT stands for Nippon Telephone and Telegraph, Japan's monopoly telephone provider. The Japanese have done a lot of stupid things, among them placing members of government in charge of Japan's major banks, which has lead inexorably towards their impending insolvency (absent a bailout by the Japanese government which would make the American Savings and Loan scandal look like a frat party that got out of hand). They DID NOT break up NTT, however.
The thing that distinguishes poor nations from rich nations is they trust individuals to make rational choices. The Japanese government built a telephone monopoly. The proper response to that situation is NOT to require government to "fix" their mistake. If a wool blanket is causing your skin to chafe, the solution isn't to replace it with another wool blanket (okay, bad analogy, but I can't think of a better one right now). The solution is to let consumers and potential suppliers, who are infinitely more knowledgeable than government bureaucrats about market conditions, make their own choices. Government needs simply to STOP what they are doing.
Let the market sort it out.
As I've pointed out in the past and will point out again, NTT stands for Nippon Telephone and Telegraph, Japan's monopoly telephone provider. The Japanese have done a lot of stupid things, among them placing members of government in charge of Japan's major banks, which has lead inexorably towards their impending insolvency (absent a bailout by the Japanese government which would make the American Savings and Loan scandal look like a frat party that got out of hand). They DID NOT break up NTT, however.
The thing that distinguishes poor nations from rich nations is they trust individuals to make rational choices. The Japanese government built a telephone monopoly. The proper response to that situation is NOT to require government to "fix" their mistake. If a wool blanket is causing your skin to chafe, the solution isn't to replace it with another wool blanket (okay, bad analogy, but I can't think of a better one right now). The solution is to let consumers and potential suppliers, who are infinitely more knowledgeable than government bureaucrats about market conditions, make their own choices. Government needs simply to STOP what they are doing.
Let the market sort it out.
Monday, March 18, 2002
An interesting article on the real reasons the Bush administration is pushing so hard for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). I have long been skeptical about the claim that drilling in Alaska will reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The sheer expense of drilling in Alaska, not to mention how little oil compared to our total oil usage would ever be found, leads one to believe that this is like chopping down the last stands of sequoias for the billion dollars over the next 20 years such a move would generate. It's simply not worth the risk, it seems to me.
What's truly galling is our nation's ongoing refusal to seriously consider enforcing fuel efficiency standards (as shown by the recent rejection of a proposal co-sponsored by John McCain to boost fuel efficiency to 36 miles/gallon over the next 12 years). If we REALLY gave a damn about reducing our dependence on middle eastern oil producers, then we would be tripping over ourselves to double fuel efficiency. Granted, all those people who engaged in the ever bigger SUV arms race would find themselves with higher fuel bills. But, for crying out loud, do we want to be more self-sufficient in energy or don't we?
We seem to be of the opinion that there is no pain involved in shifting our dependency on dodgy foreign regimes. Drilling in Alaska will NOT make up for the amount of oil we import from Saudi Arabia, however much politicians might wish to ignore that fact.
What's truly galling is our nation's ongoing refusal to seriously consider enforcing fuel efficiency standards (as shown by the recent rejection of a proposal co-sponsored by John McCain to boost fuel efficiency to 36 miles/gallon over the next 12 years). If we REALLY gave a damn about reducing our dependence on middle eastern oil producers, then we would be tripping over ourselves to double fuel efficiency. Granted, all those people who engaged in the ever bigger SUV arms race would find themselves with higher fuel bills. But, for crying out loud, do we want to be more self-sufficient in energy or don't we?
We seem to be of the opinion that there is no pain involved in shifting our dependency on dodgy foreign regimes. Drilling in Alaska will NOT make up for the amount of oil we import from Saudi Arabia, however much politicians might wish to ignore that fact.
The EU has recently approved a plan to make a European competitor to GPS. On the one hand, the US military has been holding GPS close to its vest. GPS allows a person or object to be located, with pinpoint, accuracy, anywhere on the globe. For years, however, the US government only allowed a degraded subset to be used for civilian purposes. President Clinton loosened those rules in May of 2000 to get nearly the same positioning accuracy as the US military.
This reluctance to make full GPS universally available probably was a part of the European decision to fund their own GPS system. However, given the petulance of European regulators defending their decision to go ahead with their own system, one has to question if this is the only reason (one went so far as to claim "We don't like monopolies, as you know." Guess those state-owned monopolies don't count). So much European policy these days seems institutionalized schadenfreud. Yes, America has the biggest military in the world AND the biggest economy. Whose fault is that, America's or Europe's?
A pox on both houses I guess is the fairest response. America should have opened GPS to civilian uses long ago, and Europe shouldn't be wasting its time creating another GPS.
This reluctance to make full GPS universally available probably was a part of the European decision to fund their own GPS system. However, given the petulance of European regulators defending their decision to go ahead with their own system, one has to question if this is the only reason (one went so far as to claim "We don't like monopolies, as you know." Guess those state-owned monopolies don't count). So much European policy these days seems institutionalized schadenfreud. Yes, America has the biggest military in the world AND the biggest economy. Whose fault is that, America's or Europe's?
A pox on both houses I guess is the fairest response. America should have opened GPS to civilian uses long ago, and Europe shouldn't be wasting its time creating another GPS.
