Markets handle monopolies in orders of magnitude safer and better then Governments. Competitors CAN, even if it is a expensive endeavor, eventually chip away at a private monopoly and make inroads by offering a better product.
From a historical perspective the ONLY dangers to freedoms have arisen through state monopolies/fiat. Any mistreatments of individuals by a corporation are done 1. Without a bottomless bank account and or printing press to remove incentive to please customer 2. Without the natural monopoly of having the force of law to physically compel the unwilling to accept your decisions/services/products. The state = force and zero choice. Any monopoly that worries you in the private sector should downright frighten you in the public sector with the best army in the world standing behind them.
And my solution is you guessed it, let the markets do what they do! It doesn't matter if in ONE instance a company (Comcast) tried to slowdown traffic that was hogging its network. This is a manufactured dilemma for the sole purpose of getting the FCC's foot in the door for eventual content inspection... but of course it will be just to make sure that the private sector is playing by the rules... cough...
That and I think the Constitution is a pretty righteous document, so I agree with it that the federal Government has NO authority to intervene in this area. And I don't buy the "we have to do SOMETHING!" Cry... especially when that something will eventually make the...censorship problem... an actual problem.
Great article! Gives some perspective
It is really unfortunate when people pretend these regulations are going to improve on anything.
Slashdot is overwhelmingly FOR Government control/regulation.... And when it backfires the supporters either lie about it or say "well atleast they tried something!!!!!!".
It's called the law of unintended consequences.
Great post!
This latest FCC power-grab/debacle is just the latest example as to what Government agency should be first on the chopping block and totally disbanded. The unconstitutional actions of these unelected "regulators" while operating on the taxpayer dime is simply astounding. Anyone believing the motives of the FCC are altruistic and not about ULTIMATELY gaining control over the internet is not a student of history.
We would save a bunch of money get rid of plenty of headaches if we start with dumping the FCC and move to privatizing the responsibilities of the TSA and disbanding that black-hole of money as well.
This country has far more important problems to tackle with the fools at the FCC creating an imaginary one to get there greasy paws on the freeflow of information known as the internet.
This is who you are all clamoring to have deciding if the internet is being used "fairly" or not.
Mark Lloyd the White House appointed FCC Diversity Czar:
He would love to bring back the fairness doctrine and insert central planning into the marketplace to decide what people should be allowed to say on the air and what consumers should be allowed to hear. He will say that he looks to improve "localism" and promote diversitywhich will unsurprisingly silent voices he disagrees with and promote like minded thinkers. Since he doesn't like the fair competition in a free marketplace he believes in total Government control of the market. Which has proved disastrous over and over again in history. The free market has created the most fair distribution of wealth and highest standard of living of any economic system in the history of man. Not a theory... not some idea an elitist intellectual cooked up to better control us sheep but a practical and natural allocation of resources based on individual rights, product/labor value, and supply/demand.
Below are his opinion about the American idea of freedom of speech and ultimately individual rights... These are the type of people you are trusting with your information with the first step being labeled "Network Neutrality".
"In Venezuela, with Chavez, is really an incredible revolution - a democratic revolution. To begin to put in place things that are going to have an impact on the people of Venezuela. The property owners and the folks who then controlled the media in Venezuela rebelled - worked, frankly, with folks here in the U.S. government - worked to oust him. But he came back with another revolution, and then Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country. And we've had complaints about this ever since."
- Mark Lloyd
"It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies."
- Mark Lloyd
"The other part of our proposal that gets the 'dittoheads' upset is our suggestion that the commercial radio station owners either play by the rules or pay. In other words, if they don't want to be subject to local criticism of how they are meeting their license obligations, they should pay to support public broadcasters who will operate on behalf of the local community."
- Mark Lloyd
"This... there's nothing more difficult than this. Because we have really, truly good white people in important positions. And the fact of the matter is that there are a limited number of those positions. And unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions we will not change the problem. We're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power."
- Mark Lloyd
Read more: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/mark_lloyd.html#ixzz18j9oIxxw
"[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance."
- Mark Lloyd at the FCC.from his book http://www.amazon.com/Prologue-Farce-Communication-Democracy-America/dp/0252073428
Here he is praising Chavez's crackdown on the media during a speech at a media reform seminar:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9ffAP5ixhg
"President Obama's diversity czar at the Federal Communications Commission has spoken publicly of getting white media executives to "step down" in favor of minorities, prescribed policies to make liberal talk radio more successful, and described Hugo Chavez's rise to power in Venezuela 'an incredible revolution.'"
- Washington Times
Slashdot Mirror
You seem very riled up, what insensitive jerk filled your head with all that nonsense about the Koch brothers?
Markets handle monopolies in orders of magnitude safer and better then Governments. Competitors CAN, even if it is a expensive endeavor, eventually chip away at a private monopoly and make inroads by offering a better product. From a historical perspective the ONLY dangers to freedoms have arisen through state monopolies/fiat. Any mistreatments of individuals by a corporation are done 1. Without a bottomless bank account and or printing press to remove incentive to please customer 2. Without the natural monopoly of having the force of law to physically compel the unwilling to accept your decisions/services/products. The state = force and zero choice. Any monopoly that worries you in the private sector should downright frighten you in the public sector with the best army in the world standing behind them. And my solution is you guessed it, let the markets do what they do! It doesn't matter if in ONE instance a company (Comcast) tried to slowdown traffic that was hogging its network. This is a manufactured dilemma for the sole purpose of getting the FCC's foot in the door for eventual content inspection... but of course it will be just to make sure that the private sector is playing by the rules... cough... That and I think the Constitution is a pretty righteous document, so I agree with it that the federal Government has NO authority to intervene in this area. And I don't buy the "we have to do SOMETHING!" Cry... especially when that something will eventually make the ...censorship problem... an actual problem.
Great article! Gives some perspective It is really unfortunate when people pretend these regulations are going to improve on anything. Slashdot is overwhelmingly FOR Government control/regulation.... And when it backfires the supporters either lie about it or say "well atleast they tried something!!!!!!". It's called the law of unintended consequences.
Great post! This latest FCC power-grab/debacle is just the latest example as to what Government agency should be first on the chopping block and totally disbanded. The unconstitutional actions of these unelected "regulators" while operating on the taxpayer dime is simply astounding. Anyone believing the motives of the FCC are altruistic and not about ULTIMATELY gaining control over the internet is not a student of history. We would save a bunch of money get rid of plenty of headaches if we start with dumping the FCC and move to privatizing the responsibilities of the TSA and disbanding that black-hole of money as well. This country has far more important problems to tackle with the fools at the FCC creating an imaginary one to get there greasy paws on the freeflow of information known as the internet.
This is who you are all clamoring to have deciding if the internet is being used "fairly" or not. Mark Lloyd the White House appointed FCC Diversity Czar: He would love to bring back the fairness doctrine and insert central planning into the marketplace to decide what people should be allowed to say on the air and what consumers should be allowed to hear. He will say that he looks to improve "localism" and promote diversitywhich will unsurprisingly silent voices he disagrees with and promote like minded thinkers. Since he doesn't like the fair competition in a free marketplace he believes in total Government control of the market. Which has proved disastrous over and over again in history. The free market has created the most fair distribution of wealth and highest standard of living of any economic system in the history of man. Not a theory... not some idea an elitist intellectual cooked up to better control us sheep but a practical and natural allocation of resources based on individual rights, product/labor value, and supply/demand. Below are his opinion about the American idea of freedom of speech and ultimately individual rights... These are the type of people you are trusting with your information with the first step being labeled "Network Neutrality". "In Venezuela, with Chavez, is really an incredible revolution - a democratic revolution. To begin to put in place things that are going to have an impact on the people of Venezuela. The property owners and the folks who then controlled the media in Venezuela rebelled - worked, frankly, with folks here in the U.S. government - worked to oust him. But he came back with another revolution, and then Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country. And we've had complaints about this ever since." - Mark Lloyd "It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies." - Mark Lloyd "The other part of our proposal that gets the 'dittoheads' upset is our suggestion that the commercial radio station owners either play by the rules or pay. In other words, if they don't want to be subject to local criticism of how they are meeting their license obligations, they should pay to support public broadcasters who will operate on behalf of the local community." - Mark Lloyd "This... there's nothing more difficult than this. Because we have really, truly good white people in important positions. And the fact of the matter is that there are a limited number of those positions. And unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions we will not change the problem. We're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power." - Mark Lloyd Read more: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/mark_lloyd.html#ixzz18j9oIxxw "[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance." - Mark Lloyd at the FCC.from his book http://www.amazon.com/Prologue-Farce-Communication-Democracy-America/dp/0252073428 Here he is praising Chavez's crackdown on the media during a speech at a media reform seminar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9ffAP5ixhg "President Obama's diversity czar at the Federal Communications Commission has spoken publicly of getting white media executives to "step down" in favor of minorities, prescribed policies to make liberal talk radio more successful, and described Hugo Chavez's rise to power in Venezuela 'an incredible revolution.'" - Washington Times