161–170 of 259 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We the People should own infrastructure. Want to start a new shipping company to compete with UPS? You don't have to build roads, We the People provide those to you. So, do the same with wireless.
> We the People should own infrastructure Going 4 to 3 sucked, let’s go all the way to a state monopoly!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that circular reasoning? Regulators have to allow the merger because other outcomes are unlikely, but they are unlikely because regulators always allow the merger. If the merger is blocked, the probability of that outcome falls to 0, and the others' increase, no?
You're assuming anybody else would have wanted to acquire a debt-laden company with an enormous infrastructure deficit as they mismanaged the move to 4/5g. Sprint essentially was only valuable to a company with a better LTE/5G network already in existence that users could me moved to and then Sprint's old spectrum repurposed. Anyone else would have been left with many tens of billions in network upgrade costs.
Allowing an anti-competitive merger simply because the alternatives for Sprint shareholders were bad is a bailout by any other name.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best way to resolve these issues is never "force the bad guys to do good things" but rather destroy the walls which enable their rent seeking. Regulators can work to make it extremely simple for new techs in this space to come up so there is real competition for ATT etc.
The problem is that there is finite spectrum available. The upfront cost of building a national cellular network are also astronomical, regardless of regulatory hurdles. The FCC was created to manage the scarcity inherent to the radio spectrum. It's not an area where regular free market economics apply. GP's proposal would actually make it easier for startups to horn in on the territory of the big established players…
I don't know what's worse, not adjusting for purchasing power, or not adjusting for country size.
Also targeting 100GB screams 'writer had an agenda' to me. My screen on time is absolutely atrocious and I still rarely get over 20gb a month. I'm guessing the stats must change if you choose a number that fits in most plans defaults.
I will say, I'm not terribly fond of mergers on principle. However, based on my insight as a former customer and shareholder of the company, Sprint's goose was most definitely cooked to a crisp. If this merger had not happened, I could have seen Sprint file for bankruptcy, with Verizon and AT&T picking the carcass clean. I think folks forget how dire Sprint's straits were at the time, and this specific merger truly w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Sprint's goose was most definitely cooked The reason their goose was cooked is because they previously were planning to acquire T Mobile, but SoftBank got back-channel info that it would never be approved by the anti-trust regulators. At the time they had Marcelo Claure running Sprint, basically a corporate "fixer" guy for SoftBank. So he ran the company into the dirt in order to make the merge feasible to regulator…
How is ruining and destroying the value of Sprint, that SoftBank owns, possibly good for SoftBank? What is SoftBank to gain here from enriching TMobile?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best way to resolve these issues is never "force the bad guys to do good things" but rather destroy the walls which enable their rent seeking. Regulators can work to make it extremely simple for new techs in this space to come up so there is real competition for ATT etc.
We the People should own infrastructure. Want to start a new shipping company to compete with UPS? You don't have to build roads, We the People provide those to you. So, do the same with wireless.
Anything less is giving companies control over something they should not have control over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best way to resolve these issues is never "force the bad guys to do good things" but rather destroy the walls which enable their rent seeking. Regulators can work to make it extremely simple for new techs in this space to come up so there is real competition for ATT etc.
We the People should own infrastructure. Want to start a new shipping company to compete with UPS? You don't have to build roads, We the People provide those to you. So, do the same with wireless.
Roads is a very common argument, but none of the roads are build by "we the people". Government takes your money by force irrespective of how you think it should be spent and then a completely unaccountable red tapy system that employs otherwise unemployable people decides how to spend it. After a massive waste you have some roads which are poorly built even worse maintained.
There is no need for roads to be public infrastructure. It can be fully privatized and people be asked to pay for its use. (While entire compontent of taxes that go towards road building be returned back to the people.)
We will have better roads, less traffic and more money in pocket with that model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a ridiculous proposal. Eliminating corporate bankruptcy and making employees personally liable for business debts would wreck the US economy. If debtors take a haircut then it's their own fault for lending in the first place; no one is forced to buy corporate bonds and vendors always have the option of requiring cash on delivery.
> making employees personally liable for business debts would wreck the US economy Letting employees loot the company for their own profit isn't any better.