Quazzi
Well-Known Member
Erm, no offence here, but I'm with Jerrek on this one 
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: If you were buying a TV today, which brand would you choose?
Why Deregulate?
- Thread starter kobie
- Start date
paf
Well-Known Member
Let's not forget what my original objection was. The fact that you talk about Europe as if it were one, homogenous entity.
I also didn't care for your sneering comment about Germany not wanting to do what Italians want and so on.
You did also say the industry in Europe was in a mess. You also made another sneering comment about match-box size countries, which I reckon is pretty irrelevant as far as GSM networks go (you did make that comment in conjunction with that). For an industry that is in a mess, they 1) made a surprisingly good job of mobile networks and 2) seem to shield the customers quite well from this supposed mess, because I never did have or hear of major problems with Telecommunications. Note that I am talking from the viewpoint of a consumer.
The point I want to make is 1) that Europe is just a complicated place, which has bad effects on quite a few things. No doubt about that. And 2) that the quality of Telecomminications varies significantly across the continent. So I don't accept condescending, blanket remarks that call it a mess and laugh about how stupid they must be just not being able to agree on anything (I know you didn't say that, but that's how it comes across). Especially when it takes a guy like you 2 hours to figure out what's wrong. That's pretty stunning.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
You're talking about things you don't know again.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I don't think I need to take that from you. Tell me, what other things don't I know about? And from what you say, apparently I was right, afterall.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Why not?? They are sovereign states by themselves. Republic of Texas. Commonwealth of Massachusettes.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Are you serious? Ok, let's see. Texas and Massachusettes share
- a currency
- a federal reserve
- a president, secretary of state etc.
- an army
- a senate+house of representatives
- a language
- a constitution and a supreme court
- federal intelligence services (FBI, CIA etc.)
- various federal authorities such as the FDA, FCC etc.
- national holidays
- significant parts of quite a short history
Must I go on? All of these things are only starting to fall into place in Europe, and only for a minority of European states. And almost none of these were in place in the advent of the Telecommunications industry.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Quit putting words in my mouth.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I'm not. I was asking a question.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
PAF, have you ever been in North America? Have you ever lived here? I have lived in North America, Africa, Europe, AND Asia. I am basing my statements on first-hand experience and from knowledge that I obtained from working in the telecom industry. What do you base your opinions on?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Another condescending remark. No I never lived in North America, though I spent a couple of months in the States on projects. But I lived in South America, Europe and Africa, and I too speak from experience.
And after all that, we do agree on one thing: free markets are better than monopolies.
I also didn't care for your sneering comment about Germany not wanting to do what Italians want and so on.
You did also say the industry in Europe was in a mess. You also made another sneering comment about match-box size countries, which I reckon is pretty irrelevant as far as GSM networks go (you did make that comment in conjunction with that). For an industry that is in a mess, they 1) made a surprisingly good job of mobile networks and 2) seem to shield the customers quite well from this supposed mess, because I never did have or hear of major problems with Telecommunications. Note that I am talking from the viewpoint of a consumer.
The point I want to make is 1) that Europe is just a complicated place, which has bad effects on quite a few things. No doubt about that. And 2) that the quality of Telecomminications varies significantly across the continent. So I don't accept condescending, blanket remarks that call it a mess and laugh about how stupid they must be just not being able to agree on anything (I know you didn't say that, but that's how it comes across). Especially when it takes a guy like you 2 hours to figure out what's wrong. That's pretty stunning.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
You're talking about things you don't know again.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I don't think I need to take that from you. Tell me, what other things don't I know about? And from what you say, apparently I was right, afterall.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Why not?? They are sovereign states by themselves. Republic of Texas. Commonwealth of Massachusettes.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Are you serious? Ok, let's see. Texas and Massachusettes share
- a currency
- a federal reserve
- a president, secretary of state etc.
- an army
- a senate+house of representatives
- a language
- a constitution and a supreme court
- federal intelligence services (FBI, CIA etc.)
- various federal authorities such as the FDA, FCC etc.
- national holidays
- significant parts of quite a short history
Must I go on? All of these things are only starting to fall into place in Europe, and only for a minority of European states. And almost none of these were in place in the advent of the Telecommunications industry.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Quit putting words in my mouth.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I'm not. I was asking a question.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
PAF, have you ever been in North America? Have you ever lived here? I have lived in North America, Africa, Europe, AND Asia. I am basing my statements on first-hand experience and from knowledge that I obtained from working in the telecom industry. What do you base your opinions on?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Another condescending remark. No I never lived in North America, though I spent a couple of months in the States on projects. But I lived in South America, Europe and Africa, and I too speak from experience.
And after all that, we do agree on one thing: free markets are better than monopolies.
I agree with paf, the only thing Europeans all have in common is that they live around/on the same peninsula.
<b>And after all that, we do agree on one thing: free markets are better than monopolies.</b>
wait a minute this is going to far. Imagine if SA government decided to let the rail industry be run on a purely competitive bases....do you think we could still travel by train from jhb to cpt after that??? no sane company would ever build tracks across SA, it's financial suicide, but our economy would be crippled without them...surely you must agree that some state sponsered monopolies must stick around? Im not saying that the "invisible hand" won't improve certain industries but maybe its not best always to rely on it.
<b>And after all that, we do agree on one thing: free markets are better than monopolies.</b>
wait a minute this is going to far. Imagine if SA government decided to let the rail industry be run on a purely competitive bases....do you think we could still travel by train from jhb to cpt after that??? no sane company would ever build tracks across SA, it's financial suicide, but our economy would be crippled without them...surely you must agree that some state sponsered monopolies must stick around? Im not saying that the "invisible hand" won't improve certain industries but maybe its not best always to rely on it.
paf
Well-Known Member
Ok, let me rephrase that: free markets work better than monopolies in most markets, and I think Telecomms today is one of them.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">surely you must agree that some state sponsered monopolies must stick around?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">free markets work better than monopolies in most markets, and I think Telecomms today is one of them.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I agree with both the above. There are certain state sponsered monopolies that are needed (the example of the railways is a good one) however the telco industry has reached the point where it is in the consumer and countries interest to have a deregulated environment. There are many examples from other countries that prove this....
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">free markets work better than monopolies in most markets, and I think Telecomms today is one of them.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I agree with both the above. There are certain state sponsered monopolies that are needed (the example of the railways is a good one) however the telco industry has reached the point where it is in the consumer and countries interest to have a deregulated environment. There are many examples from other countries that prove this....
<b>Are you serious? Ok, let's see. Texas and Massachusettes share</b>
Netherlands and France share:
- a currency (Euro)
- a federal reserve (European Central Bank)
- a president, ministers etc. (President of the EU)
- a senate+house of representatives (EU Parliament)
- a constitution and a supreme court (EU Constitution and EU Supreme Court)
- federal intelligence services (EU intelligence services)
- various federal authorities such as the FDA, FCC etc. (same in Europe)
- national holidays (Europe to some extent too)
Must I go on?
- a language? WTF does this have to do with anything? England and Australia share a language too.
Your point it moot.
<b>And after all that, we do agree on one thing: free markets are better than monopolies</b>
You make an excellent attempt to hide that though. I was pointing out how that is true, and along comes you disagreeing with what I'm saying and the comparisons I'm drawing.
<b>Imagine if SA government decided to let the rail industry be run on a purely competitive bases....do you think we could still travel by train from jhb to cpt after that??? no sane company would ever build tracks across SA, it's financial suicide, but our economy would be crippled without them...surely you must agree that some state sponsered monopolies must stick around? Im not saying that the "invisible hand" won't improve certain industries but maybe its not best always to rely on it.</b>
Bull****. The rail industry wasn't regulated in North America, and look: we have more rail roads than any other country in the world.
Now all of those that advocate a monopoly in the telecom market, you go ahead and pay your hundreds of dollars for a stable connection 64k or whatever. I will live in my deregulated industry and get my 5 Mbps for $45.
Just look at how damn expensive broadband is in Germany. Or France. Or Italy. It is a highway robbery compared to the price of broadband in North America. All thanks to a nice deregulated system.
Netherlands and France share:
- a currency (Euro)
- a federal reserve (European Central Bank)
- a president, ministers etc. (President of the EU)
- a senate+house of representatives (EU Parliament)
- a constitution and a supreme court (EU Constitution and EU Supreme Court)
- federal intelligence services (EU intelligence services)
- various federal authorities such as the FDA, FCC etc. (same in Europe)
- national holidays (Europe to some extent too)
Must I go on?
- a language? WTF does this have to do with anything? England and Australia share a language too.
Your point it moot.
<b>And after all that, we do agree on one thing: free markets are better than monopolies</b>
You make an excellent attempt to hide that though. I was pointing out how that is true, and along comes you disagreeing with what I'm saying and the comparisons I'm drawing.
<b>Imagine if SA government decided to let the rail industry be run on a purely competitive bases....do you think we could still travel by train from jhb to cpt after that??? no sane company would ever build tracks across SA, it's financial suicide, but our economy would be crippled without them...surely you must agree that some state sponsered monopolies must stick around? Im not saying that the "invisible hand" won't improve certain industries but maybe its not best always to rely on it.</b>
Bull****. The rail industry wasn't regulated in North America, and look: we have more rail roads than any other country in the world.
Now all of those that advocate a monopoly in the telecom market, you go ahead and pay your hundreds of dollars for a stable connection 64k or whatever. I will live in my deregulated industry and get my 5 Mbps for $45.
Just look at how damn expensive broadband is in Germany. Or France. Or Italy. It is a highway robbery compared to the price of broadband in North America. All thanks to a nice deregulated system.
paf
Well-Known Member
How long has the Euro existed? And the other institutions? And how long has the Telco industry existed, and to when does the mess you described in the Telco industry date back? And do you know how much power the so called European president has?
You like quoting and responding out of context.
Blah, this isn't going anywhere.
Just one more thing.
<b>I was pointing out how that is true, and along comes you disagreeing with what I'm saying and the comparisons I'm drawing.</b>
If you go back and read my first response (maybe read it six times) you'll see that I never disagreed with you about the monopoly/state-run thing to begin with. Mostly I dislike the way you say things.
You like quoting and responding out of context.
Blah, this isn't going anywhere.
Just one more thing.
<b>I was pointing out how that is true, and along comes you disagreeing with what I'm saying and the comparisons I'm drawing.</b>
If you go back and read my first response (maybe read it six times) you'll see that I never disagreed with you about the monopoly/state-run thing to begin with. Mostly I dislike the way you say things.
<b>
Bull****. The rail industry wasn't regulated in North America, and look: we have more rail roads than any other country in the world.</b>
Jerrek please note we are talking economies of scale here with the rail industry and a slightly different history.
Bull****. The rail industry wasn't regulated in North America, and look: we have more rail roads than any other country in the world.</b>
Jerrek please note we are talking economies of scale here with the rail industry and a slightly different history.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by paf</i>
<br /> Mostly I dislike the way you say things.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Hi paf,
Jerrek is stating his view with passion - I like and respect that. I have enjoyed both your contributions to this forum.
Personally I agree that ANY form of government control or ownership can only be detrimental.
A government competing with its own people is just a formula for failure for any country. This has never worked historically and never will.
<br /> Mostly I dislike the way you say things.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Hi paf,
Jerrek is stating his view with passion - I like and respect that. I have enjoyed both your contributions to this forum.
Personally I agree that ANY form of government control or ownership can only be detrimental.
A government competing with its own people is just a formula for failure for any country. This has never worked historically and never will.
paf
Well-Known Member
Yes, well, that's what makes these forums so much fun.
The railway thing is debatable actually. On major lines, such as CT to Jo'burg, where the infrastructure is essentially already in place, it might actually be viable. I know this is exactly the kind of debate that is going on in some countries.
But public transport is not just an econmic good, it's also a public good. So there is demand also from remote areas that needs to be met, but you would never find private money chasing that. So you'd have a market failure there which leaves only the state to run it.
The railway thing is debatable actually. On major lines, such as CT to Jo'burg, where the infrastructure is essentially already in place, it might actually be viable. I know this is exactly the kind of debate that is going on in some countries.
But public transport is not just an econmic good, it's also a public good. So there is demand also from remote areas that needs to be met, but you would never find private money chasing that. So you'd have a market failure there which leaves only the state to run it.
<b>Personally I agree that ANY form of government control or ownership can only be detrimental.</b>
Control or ownership of what?? Telecoms? please elaborate. Prehaps this could be true in South Africa where the ruling party is allied with the trade unions otherwise it seems far to broad a statement. I know of many successful arms companies for example that have been entirely owned and controlled by governments.
Control or ownership of what?? Telecoms? please elaborate. Prehaps this could be true in South Africa where the ruling party is allied with the trade unions otherwise it seems far to broad a statement. I know of many successful arms companies for example that have been entirely owned and controlled by governments.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by kobie</i>
<br /><b>Personally I agree that ANY form of government control or ownership can only be detrimental.</b>
Control or ownership of what?? Telecoms? please elaborate. I know of many successful arms companies for example that have been entirely owned and controlled by governments.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I would say that in almost every industry, including arms, ANY form of government control or ownership can only be detrimental.
UK national health system is employing private contractors from SA.
The Soviet Union and China have learnt valuable lessons of the failure of governmental control and ownership of industry.
<br /><b>Personally I agree that ANY form of government control or ownership can only be detrimental.</b>
Control or ownership of what?? Telecoms? please elaborate. I know of many successful arms companies for example that have been entirely owned and controlled by governments.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I would say that in almost every industry, including arms, ANY form of government control or ownership can only be detrimental.
UK national health system is employing private contractors from SA.
The Soviet Union and China have learnt valuable lessons of the failure of governmental control and ownership of industry.
paf
Well-Known Member
<b>Bull****. The rail industry wasn't regulated in North America, and look: we have more rail roads than any other country in the world.</b>
That would'nt be hard, seeing how big the continent is.
BTW, since when is North America a country?
Like I pointed out to you before: size is not everything. I find the following information which looks at it from different angles quite interesting:
From http://www.nationmaster.com/cat/Transportation
Per capita railway:
1. Australia 1.73km per 1000 people
4. Namibia (!) 1.31km
6. Canada 1.13km
19. US 0.76km
High speed railways (from www.economist.com) - numbers are approximate as I had to read them from a graph. You need to be a subsciber to "The Economist" to get to this stuff so I copy it in here.
1.France 1630 miles
2.Spain 750miles
3.Germany 600miles
4.Italy 590miles
5.US 460miles
And here some text that goes with those stats:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
The Spanish AVE does the 300 miles from Madrid to Seville in two hours. The French Train à Grande Vitesse (TGV) cruises at 185mph from the Channel coast to the Riviera. Germany's Inter-City Express (ICE) does the 70-mile journey from Göttingen to Hanover in less than half an hour. More than a dozen high-speed railways are under development around the world. Even the United States, with its aversion to projects financed with public money, has new trains connecting Washington and Boston that can in theory go at 150mph, though the track is in poor condition.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
From http://www.westjr.co.jp/, admittedly from 1997, but this industry isn't too dynamic:
Passenger kilometres
SNCF: 61573
Deutsche Bahn: 59628
JR-West: 54863
British Rail: 31949
AMTRAK: 8314
That would'nt be hard, seeing how big the continent is.
BTW, since when is North America a country?
Like I pointed out to you before: size is not everything. I find the following information which looks at it from different angles quite interesting:
From http://www.nationmaster.com/cat/Transportation
Per capita railway:
1. Australia 1.73km per 1000 people
4. Namibia (!) 1.31km
6. Canada 1.13km
19. US 0.76km
High speed railways (from www.economist.com) - numbers are approximate as I had to read them from a graph. You need to be a subsciber to "The Economist" to get to this stuff so I copy it in here.
1.France 1630 miles
2.Spain 750miles
3.Germany 600miles
4.Italy 590miles
5.US 460miles
And here some text that goes with those stats:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
The Spanish AVE does the 300 miles from Madrid to Seville in two hours. The French Train à Grande Vitesse (TGV) cruises at 185mph from the Channel coast to the Riviera. Germany's Inter-City Express (ICE) does the 70-mile journey from Göttingen to Hanover in less than half an hour. More than a dozen high-speed railways are under development around the world. Even the United States, with its aversion to projects financed with public money, has new trains connecting Washington and Boston that can in theory go at 150mph, though the track is in poor condition.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
From http://www.westjr.co.jp/, admittedly from 1997, but this industry isn't too dynamic:
Passenger kilometres
SNCF: 61573
Deutsche Bahn: 59628
JR-West: 54863
British Rail: 31949
AMTRAK: 8314
martin
Expert Member
I've been following this discussion with interest. You guys sure have a strange way of agreeing that certain markets should be deregulated. [
]
]I wouldn't get too exited about the SNO, initially they'll probably give telkom a little run for their money, (to give an impression of competition) and then after a while we'll see a kind of 'informal' price fixing agreement between them and telkom. I hate to be so cynical, but I look at the mobile phone industry in SA and find it hard to reach another conclusion.