Regulations that are pro-consumer are inacted in favor of companies that have departments and expertise dealing in such regimes. "We'll go along with regulation X if you put regulation Y in that works in our favor". Regulatory capture was a big contributor to our near finanical collapse in '08. No one cares or thinks about the burdens regulations place on start-ups, despite all the "innovation" speak around NN.
So your argument is non-US ISPs are advantaged by greater competition because they get Y but US ISPs are not because they are too incompetent to clone foreign regulation in a way that benefits them?
Hint: There isn't a rebuttal you can make because if it is true, then your argument is false. If it is false, it is an admission that federal regulations do actually function to increase competition to the benefit of consumers. There isn't a third option.
You don't seem to acknowledge the existence of private sector collusion either.
Suggestion: don't use circular logic when debating.
I acknowledge private sector collusion, and the answer is more competition. More regulation (usually influenced by the existing players) harms market entry. You need to constantly update the X & Y regulations so that start-ups have a fighting chance. That's painfully slow right now.
