Abolish the FCC

TalkBack 38 of 93:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Advocate needed

Appreciate your comments.

You wrote:
Would you say that customers need an advocate when buying computers, cars, corn, etc? Why can't customers just decide to buy a different product?

Good to see that old argument reappear.

If I buy a defective computer and can have it neither fixed nor reimbursed, how does the ability to buy a different computer help me?
Would you overturn lemon laws for cars?
And corn? Remember that the number of people killed by food led to creation of an inspection system. I'd say its easier to argue that this system is underfunded than that it's unnecessary.

Or take workplace conditions. Unsafe is cheaper than safe. Without an advocate, companies would either reduce safety or lose the price competition.

I know advocacy can go too far.
The people who want to control our lives can use this advocate system to gain authority over us. (The worst of the bunch are the "humans are a plague" crowd, but that's getting way off topic.)
The regulations can try to solve any possible problem and become so elaborate and expensive to implement that honorable people avoid the difficulties and hope they never get caught.
You can add more.

The fact is that because of the disproportion in resources, government does have to act as an advocate.

In the case of the FCC, that means the ability to assure customers get what they pay for and that the amount charged is not excessive because of the collusion of providers.
Each home is not assured competitive pricing. In part, this is because not many providers are trying to operate in a given geopgraphical area.


You also wrote:
Granted, it might take a bit of time to create a body of law (and consumer habits) in order to operate in such an environment, but that's more a relic of our reliance on the FCC to "manage" telecommunications markets.

and I wrote:
Corporations have a great deal of money and a strong interest in allocation of limited resources. Yes, courts can resolve these problems. But given the number of years necessary to resolve an intricate court case and the number of different decisions possible as the case works its way up the system, the courts are equivalent to no solution at all in the medium term.

Pretty close to agreement.
The only difference I see is whether this uncertainty would continue even after a period of years in which legal precedents are established.
I think yes, because of new technologies and the fact that providers have to make deals with each other. Turmoil will continue.
You think that the situation will stabilize, if I read you correctly. Not sure why you would think so.

In my view, we're better off with what's essentially an arbitration system in the FCC so that the resources the companies are fighting over can be allocated openly and more quickly.

Posted by: Anton Philidor   Posted on: 06/08/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now
• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now