That argument cuts both ways, asserts Christopher Mitchell of
the Minnesota-based Institute for Local Self Reliance (ILSR), one of my
favorite incumbent spin busters. Incumbents have benefitted from favorable governmental
policies that have been in place for decades including the availability of high
cost subsidies and public policy that permitted them to maintain a monopoly.
Not allowing government subsidization of FTTP infrastructure built by
non-incumbents in the footprints of the incumbents, Mitchell suggests, is a
double standard.
Given that telecommunications infrastructure must be broadly
dispersed in order to be economically viable and adhere to Metcalfe’s Law,
Mitchell accurately notes FTTP infrastructure builders must be able overbuild outmoded
incumbent infrastructure when they opt not to upgrade to FTTP -- and receive
government subsidies for doing so if available. That’s eminently fair and good
old American progress – the same progress that brought electricity to large
swaths of the nation in the 1930s when market forces alone could not do so.
As for the incumbent argument they will come out losers,
Mitchell observes incumbents have made losers out of nearly 20 million
Americans who according to a 2012 Federal Communications Commission estimate live
in neighborhoods incumbents redlined and declined any wireline premises
Internet connectivity, leaving them to dialup and satellite.
Click here
to hear Mitchell and ILSR colleague Lisa Gonzalez elaborate in a 13-minute
podcast.
No comments:
Post a Comment