Our government isn't smaller, but rather larger. And it isn't Comcast or BIG Business, it is shareholders. In return, one of the things they do it to employ people.
Would you prefer they fire their R&D department, and pass the savings on to the end user? In the U.S. our government does not take over business and make them companies of the state, they slowly regulate them, turning the screw ever tighter. Almost sounds like a *full employment* model. Hire more to keep track of the many useless regulations that are passed by our representatives. ANYTIME the government gets involved in business, it distorts the market place. Would you invest your 401K in the Department of Motor Vehicles, or the private sector, like Comcast? Jim W6AIM -----Original Message----- From: Elecraft [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jim Brown Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:28 PM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [Bulk] OT: Verizon's response to Net Neutrality: in Morse code!! I'm with you, Phil. As I recall, you're retired FCC staff. If anyone understands FCC Rules, you do. I WANT (caps added for emphasis) FCC regulation of our airwaves, and of our internet. I'm old enough to remember when the FCC had staff to enforce their Rules, and things were much better then. We lived in fear of the FCC, and kept our noses clean. Anyone who subscribes to cable has experienced bills that increase for no reason, and when it's the only game in town, as it is for my internet, all we can do is pay it. So YES, YES, YES, I want someone sitting in Comcast's shoulder. These assholes are billing me monthly rent for a cable modem that I BOUGHT from a local store in 2006, and there isn't a damned thing I can do about it. YES, I want regulation! Now, those who demand "small government" have made the FCC toothless, without the budget to enforce their own Rules. THAT'S why we have RF noise from all those consumer devices that make it difficult to use our ham stations, and even to tune in AM radio. 73, Jim K9YC On Thu,2/26/2015 8:09 PM, Phil Kane wrote: > That's what all the Title II fracas is about. Those of us in the > professional (regulatory) field fault the FCC of 20 years ago for not > insisting on that but creating this "information service" category > rather than putting them in the "telecommunications service" category > from the beginning. > > As hams we are used to having the FCC look over our shoulders to make > sure that we play by the rules. It's time that the "broadband" > infrastructure providers get a taste of that. ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to jbol...@outlook.com ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
