Govt Nationalization/Adoption for Certain Monopolies, Tenured/Debatable Tech

 - Jake - 03-17-2023

This post is related to some of the other posts regarding technology.  Although this is not an extreme priority, it would be a good idea, and go hand in hand with a royaling system (also mentioned in another post)...serving to protect the less fortunate, victimized and working classes, just as much as a royaling system would pedigree, conserve and indurate the uppest, ensuring that such a system has it's checks and balances, in the only way it can, through government.  Yet though at the same time, there are issues which crop up in the grey area between government and citizen, because nothing is perfect in as far as forever is concerned...issues that can cause businesses to end up running over the edges a bit, which require management and hedging from any respect, royal or not. 

There is the case of the Telecom Giant monopoly...this monopoly was different and especial because it dealt with a public utility, the electron, which crossed public and private land in cabling, much like the car traverses the road, which allowed for a certain style of monopoly that was difficult to beat once it got going.  Alot of the money spent on laying communication lines is subsidized by the people anyway, just as is with things like controlling/managing transit and dealing with power lines, etc, etc.  And in many instances, the state did alot of the digging for off the table kickbacks which went ludicrously unrecorded, and really there was no other way to get it done, showing that there should be better law around the subject.  There should be times when new, emerging tech like that is given a certain period of monopoly, just in the way that patents are given 17 years of ownership...wherein the company benefits from their side, doing half of the work or organization, and after that time period, then those communication lines, or whatever have you are returned to the people, who can then do as they plan for with by those laws.  In the 80's, certain telephone companies grew too large from the monopoly due to the inability of other companies to find alternative routes or to interfere with quasi  private lines and they burgeoned, which eventually compromised competition elsewhere as its corporate culture grew fat and stupid and spilled over from the hard influx--taking over, and then debasing other markets, placing alot of money into the hands of an "obese" culture, which ate at everything, allowing less desirable business cultures and practices to ab-naturally out-compete more desirable ones--simply because the citizens let a private company maintain privatized control of lines for so that were run on public property, with competition having been unable to run their cable because most of which happened during the construction of the new houses, suburbs, such and so forth...so the monopoly was derived more from an unnatural or at least uncivilized or unfair advantage, much like doping in the Olympics and Sports, and less from a plain sheer leap in evolutionary class and skill, like we would desire at the apex of the hill, which still can need some propping and trimming, so another may occur in a timely fashion.  These things must be taken delicately on a case by case basis, because having a king can be a good thing too.  Other monopolies have occurred which probably would call less for a direct intervention or maintenance, such as the famous monopoly of the auto giants.  In those cases, it can be more sporting to let them rule for a while, and let the common man suffer a bit in his convertible at the drive in movie with a cold beer, so that he gets off his cushy tushy and makes laws which compel himself to being better at competition instead of the assembly line, or at least higher wages, or stock...which was finally what did happen in those cases.  Then there is the case of the refrigerator...refrigerators used to last forever, now they break if you look at them wrong, so should we go after these companies, probably yes...but should we have refrigerators for multiple generations?...would that stall research and hurt us on the other end?...probably yes too, just in the way fueless engines would wipe out small towns centered around fueling stations, along with their drive-ins, culture and ultimately intercourse, also making highspeed chases and child abductions that much more successful too.

There is a happy middle...but what if one day someone took over ALL of the roads and made us pay to drive on them, to me it seems like they are...ever since the 90's the toll roads have gotten more and more extensive...what would we do then?  We pay for electricity using our communications cables already, just like we were paying to use the roads with our taxes, registration fees and gas, so could that move be justified, probably yes if we let things continue to slide, if we had been all caught up, we'd likely have free internet by now, but no.  If such a company developed a monopoly, albeit unfairly, could we grab our roads back directly?..probably yes too, but only after shoring up all the laws elsewhere, of and by due course, so that no demon had one extenuation.  So, do we do so directly or through better consumer protection laws, as advocated in another post?..who knows, but are all repairs done the same?..no, and so opens the door of possibility and the need for a human to be in control of himself under infinitude--the need to be flexible, dynamic and always paranoid in the jungle, and knowing what you're swatting at, because it might bite and/or kill you. 

Moving on...  With a possible royal systems inuring the bleeding edge of society or even without them, the little guys and more common man will need a way to shield from the falling debris, of the future's mountaineering, to better negotiate and ultimately wield their society against natural, unavoidable errors, which should occur less at the top, but when they do they tend to have a much greater fallout, shock and general durchfall.  The only way to do this would be through government, and indirectly, by having course control over the shared commonwealth.

Via an eGov system, the ways in which all of this could be done are boundless.  On a serious note, burgeoning companies with CEO's running overboard with too many yachts and not enough care for the customer could make us look bad to any neighbors out there, who might have yachts that can jump, with ion cannons, who might like the way a bikini or two looks.  I'm not saying that CEO's shouldn't have alot of yacht, but hey, if they don't spend enough time in politics, philanthropy and government as well as money, they're horseplay might single-handedly devolve society enough to starve the common man, warrior, and good stock, though especially might all but crush the even littler guys which companies rely on heavily most heavily...maybe not in sales, but surely in regular employees, who have to do jobs nobody wants to do for a minimum wage that cannot support a family, who don't have much to lose, who have guns...and knives...and could use the extra money for a 6 pack and a date once a week.

Who wants to work all day as a customer support agent for a tech giant, answering calls from customers mostly due to shortcomings in society and the economy that your boss or boss' culture could've eradicated with just a little more time in church and study hall and less on the golf course and at the frat house...because your tax dollars don't have receipts for them and so and so's family got a huge government payoff, or owns the new toll roads that shouldn't be there.  Worse than that, what good employee, say for a telecom company, wants to go home and have to pay their company the SAME price as any other customer to use their own companies product?  Like making your maintenance guy pay his rent too, it's not tradition!!  Other customers and citizens should only expect further degradation, and companies themselves of course more at risk of bureaucracy, which accelerates cultures that spread throughout society in tender time, afflicting all greater, longer---endangering us and these CEO's from the back end, stymieing progress. 

Every CEO isn't guaranteed royalty; yet so, a system such as this one to control large companies/monopolies would be a good way to claw misfits back down into the crabbucket earth, ensuring more of a social ejection a la peer revu, keeping the super rich on their toes and more careful with their weight, and also would more compel the common man who normally doesn't matter to stay more involved in government, knowing that if they vote right and work together, they can topple the big bully bad guys, and help themselves to make it rich, like busting a pinata.  If you're too rich and the poor too poor, then hey, maybe your company will get gobbled right back up if it doesn't make most of us happy.  It's one thing to steal bread from the poor, though perhaps less bad when they should not be destitute, yet still bad...generally speaking, but it's not quite as bad to steal from the mouth of decadence when an economy becomes chronically beleaguered, as ours has been...one could assume virtually 100% that such upper individuals were not donating to the correct political party, and therefore didn't really care about the average citizen or customer anyway, and got legally flash robbed, lawfully looted.  Such a system would give the little guy that final say instead of the gunshots of war or mass shootings, which is needed to keep all women and children safe...to control monopolies and eccentric rich when they cannot control themselves...elite classes must be there to make life worth living, so that we can all aspire and attain the good life...and so, they must stay so too.