This is example of a situation where "deregulation" actually decreases competition among service providers. Consumers will see higher prices because of the resulting de-facto monopolies.
A woman went into a butcher shop and asked the price for chicken. The butcher replied, "Two dollars a pound." The woman replied, "That's outrageous - down the block the price is only $1.50 a pound!"There is only one legitimate way of driving down the price of a good - and that is to increase the supply of it. I fail to see how reducing the profitability of increasing the supply of anything is going to cause its supply to increase.The butcher replied, "Then I guess you'll be buying your chicken there." The woman replied, "They don't have any chicken, though." The butcher replied, "Oh, that's different - when we don't have any chicken, we only charge $1.00 a pound!"
These "competitors" to whom the actual wirestringers like Verizon have been required to sell at a deep discount have the primary effect of reducing the profit of the telecoms attributable to DSL. If you buy DSL from a third party instead of Vorizon, Vorizon does all the work but gets less money for it than if you paid the same money to Verizon directly.
Maybe a given DSL line would be put in at the discounted price anyway - but also, maybe it wouldn't. It doesn't matter how low the price is if there is nothing on the shelf to buy.
"This is example of a situation where "deregulation" actually decreases competition among service providers. Consumers will see higher prices because of the resulting de-facto monopolies"
Maybe. In my case, I get NO service from cable or DSL providers. One reason is that DSL is so unprofitable that phone companies only deploy it in limited areas and skip over areas like mine, and many others even located in urban areas, because they knew that if they installed lines, they'd have to give them to competitors at a loss in some areas.
So if government policy on one hand says "broadband for everyone" and then on the other hand makes it impossible for the phone company to make money delivering it to as many people as possible, then one policy or the other is flawed.
You don't suppose the various State Corporation Commissions might have a word or two to say about the rates?
The FCC knows that internet over the power lines is just around the corner. The phone companies will continue to be aggressive to get subscribers on board before the next wave of competition hits. DSL will struggle for new subscribers when internet over the powerlines hits.
There is no such thing as a monopoly, unless you happen to live in a remote area. Reagan deregulated the airline industry, fired air traffic controllers, and it survived.