But wireless infrastructure is not owned by the government or companies with protected monopolies. Until they do, blocking this merger is the best course.
Taking the infrastructure into government control is political suicide, no one is going to do it. I'm not interested in giving a protected monopoly without a stronger interpretation of anti-trust law similar to United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.
Specifically, a company with a natural monopoly on distribution (wireless, cable, POTS, or fiber telecom companies) should not be able to operate or have exclusivity deals with companies in production or exhibition markets. No Sprint only phones and no Comcast owned television channels, or I'll do everything in my power to at least make sure they have plenty of healthy competitors who can keep them in check, even if it means I pay a premium.
Taking the infrastructure into government control is political suicide, no one is going to do it. I'm not interested in giving a protected monopoly without a stronger interpretation of anti-trust law similar to United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.
Specifically, a company with a natural monopoly on distribution (wireless, cable, POTS, or fiber telecom companies) should not be able to operate or have exclusivity deals with companies in production or exhibition markets. No Sprint only phones and no Comcast owned television channels, or I'll do everything in my power to at least make sure they have plenty of healthy competitors who can keep them in check, even if it means I pay a premium.