yock
Eschew the False Dichotomy
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
| reply to N3OGH
Re: Eliminating local franchises eliminates local pol graft
said by N3OGH  :You make a valid point, when it comes to greedy local politicians and franchise agreements, but... I would sure as hell rather see my franchise tax go to my local municipality, where I can show up to the township meetings (and I do) and gripe about how the people who are spending the money (the township supervisors) are spending it. With a national franchise, all that money goes to DC. It's just another drop in the bucket for them. More cash to study the mating habits of the duck billed cockroach, or to build a bridge to nowhere.... They're gonna do that shit anyway. Woulnd't you rather see the possibility of competition?
--
Wiki Wiki
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge
"Our politicians help the terrorists every time they use fear as a campaign tactic." -- Bruce Schneier |
|
Alpine
Premium
join:2000-01-11
Atlanta, GA
edit:
December 1st, @09:44AM
| said by yock They're gonna do that shit anyway. Woulnd't you rather see the possibility of competition? That's essentially my take on this. I really don't care where the money goes, since it's going to go "somewhere," as long as deployment can be accelerated.
Adam |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
 ·XMission
| reply to yock
Yeah, the competition is to see who can pay the biggest bribe to lock everyone else out. What is the difference between that and some of the local franchises? I would rather have the local franchise to keep the money local to be wasted locally, not for some fat cat in DC to waste it on something I will never see like a study on how steak and lobster in the private politicians club in DC for a below cost price at taxpayer's expense is good for America. (Wait, they do not do a study, they just take the money and go eat)
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
