FCC

FCC was created so FDR could bully any TV/Radio stations that did unfavorable pieces on the administration. The FCC (Federal Communications Commission), and later the "fairness doctrine", was created so FDR could bully any TV/Radio stations that did unfavorable pieces on the administration. It was also a way so that his son (who lived in the White House) could be paid rich consulting fees to get licenses fast-tracked, while those who didn't pay or the enemies would be slow-tracked. ℹ️ Info           ~ Aristotle Sabouni Created: 2019-04-06

🗒️ Note:
Government - I'm not someone who thinks the government is all bad, nor is it all good. Controlling something through government replaces a commerce based process (free market) and people's ability to vote with their wallet, with a political process where the people get less control and more bureaucracy. But the help is seen, the harm is unseed, so many think of it as a net win.

Alt-Liberty

Left	Right
The FCC is this great and noble institution that protects our airwaves from anarchy and bandwidth collusion.	While the excuse is not in dispute, the reality (lie of omission) is they were created for more reasons than that, and they've done a lot more than that.

Articles

FCC • [7 items]

FDR - Agencies
FDR modeled his business recovery on what the Fascists of Europe had been doing. Many assume that because it sounds so vitriolic that it must be wrong -- but if you doubt it, study the policies. Remember, that the Fascist were not as unpopular at the time as they later became. They were just a branch of Progressive Democratic Socialists, with a side of soft authoritarianism.

Cell Phones

A good example of government helping is what the FCC did for cell phones: it delayed them by 40 years. In 1945 the Saturday Evening Post was talking about handle-talkies, which could have been done with transistor radios of the time. But while the technology was known for how to do it, as well as business plans and motivation, it took until 1982 for the FCC to allocate the spectrum to do it, and another 7 years (1989) to authorize licensing the service.

FDR - Corruption
Graft is taking profit from one's political office (or taking money for their influence). The politicians of today have nothing on FDR, not even the Clinton's. As Governor FDR stated he was against graft, and was one of the largest recipients of it in history -- both directly and through his immediate family.

Licensing and Regulation
These are where Government takes your rights away.... and then will sell (lease) your liberty back to you, if you follow their rules and pay their protection money. It is a tool of force, to bully you into compliance, or to create protected markets that only the authoritarians control.

Net Neutrality
We had no net neutrality for the first 60+ years of networking, the Obama admin invented a few "regulations" in 2015 to protect us from liberty (imaginary demons under the bed and non-problems that weren't happening), and the left/media acts like repeal of that (liberty) will be going back to the slavery of 2015.

Progressives gave us
You often hear advocates claiming, "if it wasn't for progressives, you wouldn't have X...", then they explain without progressives, we wouldn't have roads, schools, police, fireman, military, or some other thing we had for decades or centuries before progressives. But I wanted to compile the other side of the equation (the balances).

Suffocating Liberty - the cost of red tape
Each new tax, law or regulation, comes with costs (compliance, non-compliance, enforcement and punishment). We have 174,545 pages of regulations, 73,954 pages in our tax code, 23,000 page in our federal legal code, double that for statutes, 300,000 criminal punishments from administrative agencies. Then add in the state+local laws, regulations and taxes on top.

Conclusion

• I'm not someone who thinks the government is all bad or is all good. Nor is the FCC.
• Controlling something through government is just a political process that increases bureaucracy: a series of rules, processes, hierarchies that slow down progress (red-tape), but increase potential accountability and order.
• Good or bad, it is a balance between the needs of the problem and cost of the solution: did you get the implementation right?
• If it could be done with industry cooperative and/or private licensing organizations, at a small fraction the size, with more accountability. Wouldn't that be better?
• If someone can't ask these questions sincerely, then they're not up for a discussion on public policy, and are incapable of understanding how to avoid the moral hazard in the future.

So I point out the abuses/problems, to understand what we've been lied to about, and what we might want to watch for in the future -- and to think about those real economic and societal balances. How we can make real progress towards something more beneficial to society, instead of just leftist "progress" (progressive) just meaning bigger government with less individual liberty and less government accountability.

🗒️ Note:

Government - There is this leftist fallacy that, "If we don't continue this disastrous failing program, why then you want NOTHING? OMG! Anarchy? Dog's and Cat's living together? Oh the humanity". Of course that's stupid. (No offense). Because: (a) even if it was true, it wouldn't make this failing system any better (b) it's not true, there's lots of ways to solve a problem, we picked the worst way (a socialist/centralized/politicized boondoggle). (c) even if I wanted to eliminate it, you need to look at what would happen -- companies would figure out ways to secure their own quality to the public. Have you ever heard of the UL (Underwriters Laboratory) to guarantee electronic goods safety? ICANN for managing Internet Addresses? The IIHS (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) that does you car safety ratings? Oh yeah, they're private / not-for-profit organization. Without government, corporations create these things anyways (and better), because consumer confidence helps sales. So the false choice is: (a) the government does it (b) nobody does it The real world choice is: (a) the government does it poorly, for more costs, wastes and bureaucracy and based on politics (b) the private sector would do it, only for less costs and more value, and improve over time more than the politically driven government solution

---

🔗 More

Organizations Organizations that I felt the need to comment on (more often on the negs than the positives). But there's good/bad in all.

Government This is looking at Government from an American, Libertarian, and idealistic PoV, that many foreigners will not understand.

The Left Lies When the truth disagrees with your agenda, you can grow (change) or lie. The left usually chooses the latter.

Alt-Liberty Two different Americas: one that's striving for more liberty, and another that's striving for less.

🔗 Links

• Wikipedia: Federal Communications Commission

Tags: Organizations  Government  Left Lies  Alt-Liberty