Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

This isn't capitalism, it's the opposite of capitalism. It's regulatory capture and government corruption. Most major ISPs are cable companies, and most ISPs/cable companies have a cozy legal arrangement with municipal areas to lock out competition. The free market is not in operation here.

Capitalism doesn't require free markets. As long as the ISPs are privately owned and operated for profit, it's still capitalism.


You've created a unique definition of capitalism that applies even to state run industries.


No, actually that's roughly the original definition of the word. But then word definitions change over time, and it's now come to be equated with free market capitalism where the capital is privately held. So you're not entirely mistaken in pointed that out.

Then again if we go by the common usage, communism is an entirely useless word, as it has come to mean "whatever china is doing".


It's not necessarily "cozy." They needed that to deliver service to places that would otherwise not get it.

Another POV: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8064947 from Chattanooga TN.


My state has a single state wide franchise agreement system, no negotiations between individual cities required. They also voided all the exclusivity provisions.

Been years now, no one's running a second set of lines, let alone third or fourth, even in the city core. It's capital intensive with a long time horizon to payoff.

People who keep blaming this on the government are fooling themselves.



They must be a major ISP?

Such coverage. Oh my.


Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact