The way I read the anti-trust laws... -- Welcome To The Crzy House

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 14:52:55 06/17/03 Tue
Author: lokisdad
Subject: The way I read the anti-trust laws...
In reply to: Drew Greyfox 's message, "Could one of the legal experts please explain to me how this manages to avoid anti-trust laws?" on 12:32:31 06/17/03 Tue

The FCC changed the rules allowing one corporation or individual to own television stations, radio stations and newspapers as long as no more than 45% of the market is owned by one corporation or individual. Anti-trust rules apply to monopolies. 45% does not constitute a monopoly. The old rules limited ownership to 35%. Michael Powell, (son of Colin), says he believes that the marketplace should decide things like ownership. I think he forgets one important thing. The airwaves belong to ME and all other American citizens. They do not belong to a corporation or individual. And as such, I want the best possible return from MY airwaves. I think a sliding tax scale for use of MY airwaves should be instituted. The more a company or individual uses the radio spectrum, the more they need to pay. You want to reach more Americans, then you get to pay more taxes, after all, it's MY airwaves you are using. Then the market will truly decide things. Since it would be a progressive tax, if a person owned only one station, then no taxes. If Faux News owner Rupert Murdoch wants control of the airwaves, then he needs to be paying for it. I don't recall giving away MY airwaves. And we need to start applying this to other things I own as an American citizen. Federal lands that are mined or grazed upon need to be taxed too. More than the piddling amount they are taxed now. If the government wants to charge me $10 for visiting my national monuments and parks, then the coal mine or drilling company need to be paying a nice chunk of change too. No more corporate welfare. That needs to be our mantra when fighting the Republicans. Sorry if I went off tangent here. My "government" is getting me riled up lately.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]