I don't get how it's sarcasm if you seem to genuinely subscribe to the idea that market forces ever determined the prices of necessities. Did you just mean the last bit about competition was sarcastic? Wouldn't that mean the opposite is assumed to be the appropriate value?

All but one gone acquired by mid-2010s.

Those acquisitions happened as the new entrants were going through (or rapidly approaching) bankruptcy.

The big3 bought them at fire sale prices.

They severely underestimated how much capitol spending they needed to do in order to adequately serve this massive sprawling country.

It used to be that the "market" dictated what the price would be. Now it's just unbridled greed. The ISP folks now even out their prices like the gasoline companies of old. Such fierce competition! /s

I switched off Fido (Rogers budget carrier) not long ago, and I did get offered a sweet winback deal, but I told the contractor frankly that no, they've lost my trust after raising my monthly price 3 times in 18 months.

I'm especially glad I made the switch now that they're trying this again.

Nationalize Bell

I've been watching the telecom landscape since 2005-6. I recall all the gov't talk and action about competition. Spectrum got dedicated for new entrants, 3-4 of them showed up. All but one gone acquired by mid-2010s. The last one got acquired in 2022. This was a perfect example for how competition is a at best a temporary solution to the fundamental problems of capitalism.

Yes, you're right, that term is the correct one

I believe the term is oligopoly.

Collusion through and through.

They should be all taken out back and dragged into public ownership against their corporate will.

But it's not an oligarchy right?

This reminds me I have to do my semi annual ISP rotation