I have some doubts about his analysis, but a good starting point would be that if the policy goal is to enact regulation that would transfer economic surplus from the owners of cable networks to television watchers, we could do something much simpler — mandate lower prices! After all, why would you have the government fussing over cable companies' pricing strategy at all? The reason is that it's an uncompetitive market with huge fixed costs and barriers to entry. Consequently, the prices charged soar far above marginal costs thanks to monopoly pricing power. So in principle there can be welfare-enhancing price regulation.
If you're going to go down that road, you may as well just go down the damn road. Order companies to cut prices, then when they complain about reduced profits and lower returns on investment, tell them you don't care — you're trying to reduce profits. I'd say a better approach to either of these ideas is to try to enact pro-competition regulations that address the root causes of America's poor wireline telecommunications infrastructure. But if we're going to follow the regulated monopoly approach, just grab the bull by the horns and cut prices rather than fussing about the bundling.
TODAY IN SLATE
Blacks Don’t Have a Corporal Punishment Problem
Americans do. But when blacks exhibit the same behaviors as others, it becomes part of a greater black pathology.
I Bought the Huge iPhone. I’m Already Thinking of Returning It.
Scotland Is Just the Beginning. Expect More Political Earthquakes in Europe.
Lifetime Didn’t Think the Steubenville Rape Case Was Dramatic Enough
So they added a little self-immolation.
Two Damn Good, Very Different Movies About Soldiers Returning From War
The Most Terrifying Thing About Ebola
The disease threatens humanity by preying on humanity.