Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: New Zealand Sysop Fights Telco on Business Rates
Message-ID: <16259@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 21 Jan 91 18:08:18 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 29
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 44, Message 6 of 11


In article <16105@accuvax.nwu.edu>, clear@cavebbs.gen.nz writes:

> This has two important lessons for TELECOM Digest readers in the USA: 

> 1 - A totally deregulated telecommunications environment is not
> desirable except in economics textbooks, as not only could I not have
> appealed the "business rates" decision (PUCs? Hell, this is
> DEregulation!) but there is no regulatory body stopping Telecom (or
> even my ROC) from introducing a special tariff for hobby BBS systems.

Au contraire; in a *totally* deregulated telecommunications
environment, you wouldn't be forced into the arms of a single telco.
Complete deregulation would allow competition in both the long
distance and local markets, and you'd be able to switch to a competing
telco if not satisfied with your current one.

The problem you're experiencing is a result of *unbalanced*
deregulation.  There is still a regulation giving the telco a legal
monopoly, but some of the regulations protecting consumers from that
monopoly have been removed.  Regulation does have its place, and
telcos that gain the privilege of monopoly must be prepared to
surrender some of the normal privileges of the market as well.


Bob Goudreau				+1 919 248 6231
Data General Corporation		goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com
62 Alexander Drive			...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA