Economic: We can't stop the media monopoly now, yet RP's policies will create even more monopolies!?

[BuffsForPaul]

deleted

 

[Tarzan]

what about utility monopolies?

What about them?

You have monopolies setup by the federal government (or policies) which is one set of issues.
You have monopolies setup by state and local government (like utilities) which is a separate set of issues. Now, some of the utility monopolies are supported by the federal government (thank god the the DoEnergy)... but, quite a bit of it is a local, regional or state issue.

That's why its important to be involved in local government (regional, state, etc) as well. The smaller the size of government, and the more immediate effect it has on our lives, the more likely we are to get involved and take action. Being a republic takes work. Try to hire the best representatives possible... then, watch those f*ckers like a hawk and be proactive.

This is part of the reason the 17th Amendment should be overturned... that who you send to the state to represent you is important (because they would choose the Senators to represent the state in DC) and makes you pay more attention and be more involved in local elections (long explanation for another place).

But... back to utilities... what is your specific question? Local action and involvement will probably address most of your concerns (though, we ain't doing it now).

Welcome to the forums!

 

[BuffsForPaul]

deleted

 

[wayfarinstranger]

What about Monsanto? While they certainly have benefitted from bedfellow status with federal regulatory agencies (i.e. FDA and EPA), they seem to have no problem utilizing the court system to achieve their goals. Given their monolithic presence in the U.S., how would the free market do a better job in regulating them from this point?

 

[Captain Caveman]

My 'vote' would be to start with one media name.. O'Reilly for example, and start mailing his advertisers voicing discontent and boycott of their product.

The smaller companies that run ads on his show would be a place to start, when one smallish company pulls ads, then move on to the next company.

Can we muster 1000 unique emails?

Vote with your wallet too.

 

[Tarzan]

What about Monsanto? While they certainly have benefitted from bedfellow status with federal regulatory agencies (i.e. FDA and EPA), they seem to have no problem utilizing the court system to achieve their goals. Given their monolithic presence in the U.S., how would the free market do a better job in regulating them from this point?

These court rulings are a mystery to me!!! How a company could contaminate their neighbors crops with GMO laden spores... then, have the legal system support them in their claims when they have not been able to control their own questionable products is beyond my comprehension. They are like the owner of an out of control male dog that gets loose in your neighborhood... jumps the fence into your private property... then attacks and inseminates your prize winning canine. Any legitimate local court in the country would rule against the owner of the male dog... instead, the courts are ruling in favor of the owner of this wild dog and punishing the owner of the prize winner.

Another example might be a polluter who dumps chemicals into the river upstream of your private property. Then, when you drink water from the now contaminated river on your property, charges you for drinking their chemicals... with the support of government and the legal system... mystifying!!!

It is beyond reason and legal understanding. The only conclusion that comes to mind is that something is amiss in these legal decisions. There should be a review of all of them to determine if any undo influence or other shenanigans have occurred. The word "corruption" comes to mind... but, I can't imagine why.

Apparently, if you can't create a monopoly using government legislation... you can do it by paying off people in the legal system (of course, I mean hiring & paying for lawyers... because no one could every buy off a judge) to achieve the same ends.

 

[Jandrsn21]

Drudge Tweeted months back that, the major news networks got bailouts! Why is that? They are losing money and market share! In a free market, when you hide the news, you lie, and you deceive, you lose and there is no one to bail you out! Also without government regulations on the internet and with the way media is going online, monopolies won't be much of a problem going forward, unless the government steps in to stop that!

 

[beardedlinen]

It seems ironic that Ron Paul is against monopoly regulation, yet has spent his entire political life as a victim of one in the form of the media. He says consumers are smart. But look at how they've let the media rule and the trickle down consequences that has had on our society.

Is the media monopoly a preview of what a RP presidency would look like, but for ALL "monopolizable" industries?

I'm voting for RP. But I don't agree with him always.

We currently live in a state of crony capitalism, wherein the Government is in bed with the corporations and vice versa. This is not a free market. A true free market lets the people decide which businesses flourish and which go bankrupt, not the Federal Government. The very idea of bailouts, tax exemptions, and corporate welfare is the antithesis to a free market.

 

[Enforcer]

Sorry I don't see how the media is a monopoly at all. There are thousands of media companies competing. Do you know what a monopoly is OP? Perhaps you aren't wording your complaint right.

If you can't see a monopoly, you have to be blind. You can watch any news broadcast and record another. Immediately after viewing one, look at the other. How can they think the same, identical things are equally important? I remember when O.J. Simpson was in the news. Long after he was "news" the media kept showing his ugly mug on tv. I had to start renting videos just to keep from seeing that on EVERY station. If it weren't for monopolies, we would have heard about the suppressed news from SOME source.

 

[erowe1]

It seems ironic that Ron Paul is against monopoly regulation, yet has spent his entire political life as a victim of one in the form of the media. He says consumers are smart. But look at how they've let the media rule and the trickle down consequences that has had on our society.

Is the media monopoly a preview of what a RP presidency would look like, but for ALL "monopolizable" industries?

I'm voting for RP. But I don't agree with him always.

I don't understand. Are you suggesting that the free market breeds monopolies, and government regulation stands in the way of them?

Do you come from the same planet as Bizarro Superman by any chance?

 

[Dr.3D]

I doubt it is so much about monopolies, but rather stratigic buying of the media outlets.
Here is a pretty good and revealing video about it.
Behind the Big News.
[video=google;6632255652046262625]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6632255652046262625[/video]

 

[tfurrh]

Regulations by the free market, and regulations by goverment are apples and wormy, wormy oranges. A free market monopoly is not a bad thing.