Take a quick look at this article by economist Arnold Kling. He suggests US healthcare regulation be altered so that the regulatory regime of service provision remains delegated to states. However, consumers can select a care plan from a provider in any state and be subject to the regulations of that state. This provides competition among regulatory regimes.
Now substitute “telecom” for “healthcare”.
For Discussion. Does this work for connectivity as well as application services (e.g. VoIP)?
Posted by Martin Geddes at 10:30 AMTrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telepocalypse.net/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/mgeddes/MT/mt-tb.cgi/358.
I have read some of the comments posted on the economics site, as well as the original article by Radley Balko and Michael Cannon. As I see it, the arguments for/against healthcare insurance regulation are social/political/ethical ones as much as economic ones - a healthy lifestyle is a Good Thing, equitable access to healthcare insurance is a matter of Social Justice, etc etc. I don't see these social/political/ethical considerations playing such a big role in telecoms regulation.
From a service-oriented perspective, I am interested in the possibilities for differentiated service. The healthcare insurance providers want to differentiate between different classes of risk, and are being prevented from doing so by regulation. As far as I can see, the telecoms industry is not being prevented from differentiating its services - indeeed it is pioneering many aspects of differentiated service. However, regulators are naturally concerned to ensure that this is done fairly and without distorting competition. (Whether they can achieve this regulatory goal is of course another matter.)
cheers, Richard
Posted by: at December 12, 2004 03:07 AM