jjoshua
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ | That's not the way it's supposed to work
The government should not be involved in a rev share. The government, in the public's best interests, should make the spectrum available to the highest bidder. |
|
chemaupr
join:2005-06-06
Alexandria, VA | Isn't the public best interest to have FREE ACROSS THE US internet access.
Rev Share.... is better than taxing the hell out of your life, if you ask me. |
|
wresnick
join:2003-08-03
Union City, CA
| reply to jjoshua
If revenue is in the public's best interest, then rev share and bidding are both viable options. The one that has the potential of generating the most revenue is the most viable if that's the goal.
If the goal is to serve the best interest of the public, then the allocation should depend on potential uses and how they benefit the general public. If free WiFi makes sense, then companies should be able to state their case. If all other things are equal, then auctioning things off makes sense, unless a sound financial analysis shows a better potential with revenue sharing.
People lease land from governments. They pay taxes in proportion to profits. Governments make profits from auctions, leases, taxes based on value, taxes based on size or area, and taxes based on revenue. Aside from semantics, isn't the last category a form of revenue sharing? |
|
