Ajit Pai killed rules that could have helped Florida recover from hurricane

[SilverFang01]

The radical deregulation of the telephone industry, despite the lessons of previous natural disasters such as Hurricane Sandy, guaranteed that providers would chose to cut costs and increase profits rather than invest in hardening networks or emergency preparedness. That is how markets actually work in the real world (as opposed to in the delightful deregulation fantasy land dreamed up by hired economists).

Pai blames carriers, but he killed rules that were spurred by Hurricane Sandy

[Black Aeronaut]

And good luck in having competition spring up to challenge the giants in the market. The Objectivist Ideal that a market will naturally respond by fostering such competition, likening it unto how an ecosystem in the wilds works, is a fantasy. They forget about the one major issue that any young predator has to deal with when trying to establish their territory: the other competitors.

Because, as happens in the wilds, older, more capable predators with established territory will kill the younger competitors in order to keep their territory.

Except, unlike nature, it's very rare for one of these older predators to get sick and die.

It would be a disaster for that to happen, after all. /s

[ECSNorway]

The radical deregulation of the telephone industry, despite the lessons of previous natural disasters such as Hurricane Sandy, guaranteed that providers would chose to cut costs and increase profits rather than invest in hardening networks or emergency preparedness.

Deregulation is not the sole cause of this, of course. The guarantee of a federal disaster bailout makes it easier and cheaper for them to simply take the loss and rebuild than it is to build a network that can resist this kind of damage.

We need to be cutting corporate welfare, not personal welfare.

[LynnInDenver]

The radical deregulation of the telephone industry, despite the lessons of previous natural disasters such as Hurricane Sandy, guaranteed that providers would chose to cut costs and increase profits rather than invest in hardening networks or emergency preparedness.

Deregulation is not the sole cause of this, of course. The guarantee of a federal disaster bailout makes it easier and cheaper for them to simply take the loss and rebuild than it is to build a network that can resist this kind of damage.

We need to be cutting corporate welfare, not personal welfare.

Unfortunately, they've done a good effort on educating those in power that the corporate welfare is needed for job generation, even while most people watching the economics say it isn't quite working like that. Also, I'm of the opinion that, like insisting it's impossible to pay a living wage, if you need tax breaks and incentives? THEN YOU'RE ACTUALLY NOT A PROFITABLE COMPANY. It's basically another way to "cook the books".