&gt; Another case of the government intervention in the free market hurting the consumers<p>Your statement is worded as if this is the expected outcome whenever there is government intervention in to a market.  I&#x27;m not sure if I perhaps misinterpreted that, because your conclusion suggests further regulation.  Regulation (from government intervention) doesn&#x27;t ruin a market - bad regulation does.  Just like all private companies are not like Enron - some governments have regulated the telecom market to increase competition.<p>It&#x27;s easy to critique the failings of regulation because there are so many examples.  Good regulation in my limited observations is very difficult.  In my experience, the best regulations are from independent groups such as IEEE.  IEC-60079 (Explosive Atmospheres) for example is a great set of rules and regulations from my perspective.  As a manufacturer it would likely increase costs, and pure market thinks may suggest that the safest&#x2F;cheapest manufacturer would win.  However that simply doesn&#x27;t happen in the real world as there are many more variables that our simple models account for.<p>I&#x27;m afraid I&#x27;m not sure what Georgian rent over space means, so I can&#x27;t comment there.  However I believe you have effectively suggested more regulation - rather than encouraging further free market, which I would agree with.<p>Any time there is a monopoly (poles in the ground), it must be controlled with appropriate regulation to ensure the system isn&#x27;t abused.  I lean towards government owned and privately operated&#x2F;maintained in these scenarios - however that too has it own set of dangers.