how-to block ads
|
Industry_Pro
@att.com
| reply to TK Junk Mail
Re: My lobbiers can beat up your lobbiers
>Innovation and freedom over government regulation is >correct.
I personally agree with this. Yet the truth is that advocates for the Bell monopoly system (being re-formed in front of our eyes) have always craved regulation - mainly those regulations which make it impossible for anyone else to compete. Ted Vail (ATT President who created the monopoly system in concert with the government) basically stated that they were willing to trade more regulation by the government, in return for favorable government regulations that would create and preserve the monopoly. The whole AT&T idea was that the nation's communications system was to be created as a "regulated natural monopoly"
As is quoted in the URL's below -
-------------------------------------------------
His name was Theodore N. Vail. He's the man who built the Bell telephone system in the early years of the last century, who said, "We have to be regulated, so let us think through what form regulations should take."
--------------------------------------------------
Here are some URL's about this:
»www.bellsystemmemorial.com/whatk···ell.html
»72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:WNo···nt=opera
»www.pfdf.org/conferences/drucker01.html
So, in fact, the Bell monopoly apologists are disingenuous in the extreme to claim that they don't want regulation. In fact they only don't want *certain* regulations - the ones that don't benefit them. In trade they offer politicians popularity through selling unprofitable accounts to rural and impoverished or low density constituents, and cash payments in the form of election funds and so forth. It's a scam and has been for over 100 years.
It's also funny to see Bell monopoly apologists claim to be for "freedom" when in fact the whole telecom infrastructure was built using government forces to prevent anyone else from building a similar infrastructure. Remember, AT&T's agreement with the government was that the government would use it's resources to enforce a monopolistic system. It was made criminal to try and offer competing services, or even compatible equipment. *That's* the history of the now supposedly capitalistic, free market Bell system. It was all funded and built on a fascist/socialist government/industry collusion, and that's an indisputable fact of history.
Now they want to claim to be free market, no regulation types - when that's convenient for them. Well that's just "a load" as we say in Texas. *They* eliminated the free market in telecom over 100 years ago and *begged* for government regulation.
All our problems with telecom today are related to the abandonment of the free market to create a socialist ideal called "universal service" - and to buy votes.
- IP | |
jslik
That just happened
Premium
join:2006-03-17
clubs:
| said by Industry_Pro :
So, in fact, the Bell monopoly apologists are disingenuous in the extreme to claim that they don't want regulation. In fact they only don't want *certain* regulations - the ones that don't benefit them. With all respect to Ed McMahon: "You are correct, sir, YES!" | |
|
