Why Are Economists So, Well Just Ignorant...?

I read a piece by a Stanford Economist who is alleging that one should not allow Common Carriage over the Internet Transport companies, such as CATV companies. He alleges:

Under net neutrality, Owen said, Internet service providers are unlikely to offer costly service improvements to anyone if they cannot recover the costs. "At least on the surface, it seems that net neutrality would condemn all users to the same not-terrific and slow-to-improve service," he said. By the end of the 20th century, Owen said, a broad consensus developed among economists that price regulation of industries was unlikely to improve consumer welfare. "Maintaining efficient prices and providing incentives for progressive management of regulated firms rarely works," he wrote.

 Now admittedly he is at Stanford, and down the street a way are all those app companies etc but he is an economist after all, so we cannot expect much regarding technical reality.

You see the Internet was designed and is looked at as an hourglass, thin in the middle, limited capabilities, just allowing say TCP/IP. The smarts were at the edge, then end, with the users. That has worked for a real long while. The problem is that we have allowed the CATV folks to get between the TCP/IP path and the end users. That is against the prime directive, that is what the argument concerning Internet Neutrality is all about. Imagine a world with only MSNBC, and you have Comcast's view of life.

By making the carrier a Common Carrier they do what they are supposed to. Common Carriage does not mean rate regulation, never did, only in the minds of those who fail to understand it. It means openness and level playing fields, etc, those catch phrases so common in DC.

The Internet is meant to be minimalist and not really pay attention to what is being sent across it. Each packet is equal. Each packet gets charged the same. Competition helps, but frankly until the wireless companies get their acts together we are left with 1970 technology from CATV companies. Remember that we change out our mobile devices at least every other year while the average age of a cable modem is 10+ years. They have NO motivation to innovate. So why should they be motivated to do anything other than take actions to further disable their customers. The only answer is Common Carriage, as Elizabeth I set up in 1603!

But also from an economics perspective, why should we tolerate bundling. CATV companies are notorious for that.  We all understand that, we should pay for what we get from them, transport to a meet point. Tell me what it is and don't get in the way! Simple economics, simple antitrust. But not simple for some folks.