New FCC Boss Talking A Lot, But Saying Little

Nuff said...

Yes, what we've got is another lawyer trained since birth to actually never say anything at all. If you say nothing, you can't be accused of lying and you can't be held accountable for promises you have never made.

PS:>> Read the full WSJ Q&A at this link:
»www.google.com/url?q=htt ··· 157.html

He probably doesn't either hear or understand the questions.
This the typical way these people answer questions, by saying what they think the people want to hear.

some of his phases and words:

respect for the power of private industry
create jobs
generate economic growth
respect for markets
market-driven innovation
job creation
opportunity
job creation
economic growth
innovation
job growth
economic activity
innovation and competition

As you see from these two statements it is just a bunch of meaningless babble. I bet he got a list of "key words" to hammer on.

For example:
Job growth
economic growth
innovation

He put's it all together in this answer from the Q&A
the Internet has been the most successful driver of economic growth, job creation and innovation, perhaps, that we've had in the country

We are so in for it. This "stimulus" is going to ruin America. Some day it's going to all catch up with us and we won't have anything left to fall back on.

As Bruce Williams say's
"You cannot borrow yourself into prosperity"

He gave his first interview since taking office and Karl thinks he's talking too much. (I know I've promised several times not to criticize Karl. Can't help it.)

No, the problem is:
He's not saying anything...All the answers sound the same.
I think we need someone in there who knows broadband is not the name for the latest all girl band.

Talking is fine. Actually saying something while you're talking is important, however.

...and everything he responded with was stated like a true politician or lobbyist: skirt the question without answering it directly.

He's not an idiot like Powell or a pawn like Martin, so the worst label you can apply is that he's too uncontroversial. And he's been on the job almost a month. This is going to be a long four years!

Yep, this is a recurring problem with FCC appointments. The two most important elements of communications policy are 1)engineering and 2)economics. Understanding not only how networks work and how they are deployed but also the economics of supply and demand and measuring competition are crucial.

Does Genachowski have an engineering degree or any real technical experience with networks, wired or wireless? Nope. Does he have any training in microeconomics or public choice theory? Nope.

He is waiting for someone to walk in with a suitcase filled with money before he makes up his mind what special interest he will support (remember Google/Net Neutrality is a special interest).

Sounds like he is a die hard pro-business, who wants to use grants and pork to enrich the regulated.

Theres a mini-bio at Ars.
»arstechnica.com/old/cont ··· wski.ars

that doesn't make me feel any better.

Net neutrality is a "special interest" for the consumer.

Actually, his entire administration acts like they're still running for election. Note to Dear Leaders: Election over - time to do real work - SOME of your 'subjects' can tell the difference between BS and positive results

That's because he's waiting on his puppet master to either pull the strings or put his hand ...

Like all the other half baked promises I've heard in the past six months. This guy won't do anything to help us, only the pres's elitist buddies.

I actually dont think the policies are meant to do anything other than convey the appearance that someone is doing something. The more they (the whole administration) talk about doing things, the less actual work they need to do. Its a great system, keep trying to sell the "dream" (even though the election is a distant memory already), while scrambling behind the scenes to figure out what to do. Want to waste another week, setup a bunch of "meetings" with the press!

EDIT: I should add that the one thing the administration is FANTASTIC at is spending our great grandchildren's money. That and "not raising taxes" (yeah right!) of course.

I know. Thats why all hope is not lost. There are entities with money and influence behind the consumer on that topic (net neutrality), but only because it meets their capitalistic agenda (3rd party streaming on demand PPV, VOD, and telecomferencing/social networking).

He sounds like a puppet, I wonder if you can see his strings as he walks

Actually in order to help fund the national healthcare plan the government plans to raise $500 billion over 10 years by taxing the rich.

I think the stimulus money has been spent well enough to help stabilize the economy. There's the usual waste and special interest back-scratching that goes along with this much money, but overall the government seems to have done a decent job.

Sure thats what they say, but who do you think employs the "poor"? Every business will pass the 'new' cost of doing business on to their customers. This new policy will literally have the opposite effect of the famed "trickle down economics", by actually increasing the costs of goods and services (and raising taxes at the same time).

Agreed. I need that conviction from him, or else that bleak outlook on BB policy continues with the lip service(s). Even if it is flying in the face of years of FCC "performance", so be it. Please, do something. We (as in RURAL AMERICA) have been waiting. NBC even did a piece on Monday about "LACK" of rural bb.