 maxwell2112Rock n Rolls all night and
join:2002-02-10
Ferndale, WA | reply to nc1165
Re: Sure, it looks good on paper well...............ill be a badly beaten baby seal |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to cidhigh42
said by cidhigh42:
What's so bad about Marxism? It's just scientific socialism...
It ignores human nature.... just like "Free Market theory" does too. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to redleaf
said by whoogled:
I like market forces because they're neutral... most of the time.
Yeah... Neutral as in "money talks". Even better: Everyone is neutral... but some are more neutral then others.
IE, he who has the gold, makes the rules. |
|
 nc1165
join:2001-04-10
Delray Beach, FL | reply to JerryS38
Re: Noband OK - I'll go half way with you on this since prior to the big roll-out, media consisted of town criers and guitar strumming ballad singers, but where there is a will, (and lots of money) there is Time-Warner cable. The government's intervention into such areas as radio, for example, was necessary to manage the growth and administer frequencies.
I believe the underlying question is regarding the government's duty in providing broadband and whether, per our debate, they have a duty or obligation to expand this infrastructure to include broadband equipment (DSLAM's, etc.) at the expense of the taxpayer or do we wait for the Bell companies to purchase and install it as it behuves them to do so based on profit models.
Also, as a parting reminder, remember what is targeted whenever there is a coup in a country to take over the government and it's citizenry - media a.k.a. communications infrastructure.
Thanks for participating.
--
If my enemy cuts me, I will drown him in my own blood. |
|
BeeperPart Of The Problem
join:2001-09-27
Dayton, OH | reply to KrK
Re: Sure, it looks good on paper said by KrK:
said by cidhigh42:
What's so bad about Marxism? It's just scientific socialism...
It ignores human nature.... just like "Free Market theory" does too.
Um, free market theory counts on basic human greed, to look out only after your best interests. That's the Invisible Hand at work.
--
Guaranteed Fear and Loathing. Abandon all hope. Prepare for the Weirdness. Get familiar with Cannibalism. |
|
| reply to nc1165
Re: Noband said by nc1165:
I believe the underlying question is regarding the government's duty in providing broadband and whether, per our debate, they have a duty or obligation to expand this infrastructure to include broadband equipment (DSLAM's, etc.) at the expense of the taxpayer or do we wait for the Bell companies to purchase and install it as it behuves them to do so based on profit models.
I like the way you have summed this up, nc1165.
I do not believe the government has such a duty in a constitutional sense. Some loose constructionists could construe the Interstate Commerce Clause to mean not only "regulate", but also promote. But this is quite a stretch. Then again, that clause has been stretched in some abominable ways already.
However, History shows the building of infrastructure benefits the civilization that builds it. The Romans built excellent roads, and thus they managed to control most of the world they knew.
If I am right and the Internet is a revolutionary new way for people to communicate, it would indeed behoove any government to build the infrastructure for it.
I mostly believe in Capitalism (with limits), but the fact is Capitalism just doesn't work were competition is not feasible. The nature of some kinds of infrastructure (like roads and sewer lines) is such that competition is simply not feasible. I believe that the government should step in these rare situations and establish publicly owned monopolies.
These public monopolies are no silver bullet. They have to be carefully structured so they remain responsive to the public they serve and to minimize the fraud, waste, and abuse that it Standard Operating Procedure in so many government agencies.
--
Honey, the fairies are going to drive me to drink - My brother. |
|
| I'm goin to give your post as many vote ups as I can Eatmeingreek.. I didn't realize we had a very similar point of view until now. Funny how a discussion can do that.
Rob
--
Help! Help! I'm being oppressed!! |
|
| reply to Eatmeingreek
Yes, i agree compleatly. What are we disagreeing about, exactly? You havent said it, but you imply that broadband internet is as important as roads and sewer systems.
I think we are disagreeing about the responsiveness of government workers. I hapenn to be an employee of the State of Connecticut and happen to be in customer service, and do my job well. The way I see it, a government monopoly would not be as bad as a private one.
Thats what it all comes down to, weather or not you get public oversite, when you have to be stuck with a monopoly. Everything else is basically immaterial.
Rock on. |
|
| reply to nc1165
Re: Sure, it looks good on paper Thesis -> Antithesis
--------------------------
Synthesis |
|
| reply to cidhigh42
Re: Noband said by cidhigh42:
The way I see it, a government monopoly would not be as bad as a private one.
I made this very point in an earlier post. The executives of any private company that enjoys a monopoly in a capitalist system have a fiduciary duty to screw their customers.
Their responsibility to the stockholders is to maximize profit and minimize cost. In the absence of competition, the easiest and most efficient way to do this is to offer less products and services at an ever increasing price. Think about this the next time you are plunking down some hard-earned on a Microsoft OS.
I meant no disrespect, cidhigh42. I did not know you work for a state government. I am sure there are many honest hardworking people in government, and especially in local and state government.
--
Honey, the fairies are going to drive me to drink - My brother. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to Eatmeingreek
Amen! |
|
