'Private good, public bad'
Proportion of properties connected to full fibre broadband:
🇰🇷98%
🇯🇵97%
🇬🇧10%
South Korea has a state-owned broadband service.
Doesn’t this illustrate the failure of the neoliberal market model to deliver public goods?
5 comments:
From Internet in Japan
Quote:
NTT, formerly a state monopoly, was privatized in 1985 and reorganized in 1999 under a law promoting functional separation between the company's mobile, fixed-line, and Internet services. Asymmetric regulation, with stricter rules for carriers with higher market share, helped to diversify the industry.[3] Japan has three major mobile operators—au by KDDI, NTT's DoCoMo, and Softbank.[7]
While the market is open, the NTT group remains dominant and the Japanese government is still the mandated largest shareholder of NTT.
Thanks for the info.
Intelligent people write and read TEXT, for which a slow broadband speed is perfectly OK. That's what people who read Mike Norman Economics do.
Text is a much quicker and more efficient way of diseminating information than video (which is where fast broadband comes into its own). I.e. fast broadband is for people who like smily human faces, and coloured objects which move and make a noise.
In short, I see no good reason to subsidise fast broadband or for the state to get involved.
My bank statement arrives in an enormous pdf. Think of the dialup users, you fiends.
Obviously subsidized broadband works well. Or are South Koreans complaining about it?
Post a Comment