Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: Re: Re: Response to David Reed
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:38:12 -0400
From: "Gerry Faulhaber" <gerry-faulhaber () home com> To: <farber () cis upenn edu> Subject: Re: Re: Response to David Reed Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:28:50 -0400 I'm glad Mr. Berger is open to *some* use of markets and property rights. Let me clear up a few points in his post: Virtually no one who currently controls spectrum is permitted to share it, lease it, or sell it to anyone; furthermore, they can only use it for the express purpose (say, TV broadcasting) permitted in their license. There is no market because no one is permitted to buy and sell licenses, or to use them for anything other than the original FCC mandate. Them's the rules, and yes, they stink. But to fault "TV/radio broadcasters for [not] being open to sharing or leasing their spectrum" ignores the FCC licensing rules; it would be illegal for them to do so. This is not to say that the broadcasters *would* do it, if they had a chance; but so far they haven't had a chance. It may be that "monopolists don't ever want to share or lease" (I don't think this is actually true), but please tell me where the monopolist is in spectrum. If we put spectrum ownership into private hands right now, there would be hundreds, maybe thousands of owners of spectrum, many of whom would be happy to sell or lease. If the TV guys won't lease there will be plenty of people that will. You don't need everyone who owns a good (a house, say, or a piece of the spectrum) to be willing to put it on the market, in order to have competition; all you need is enough owners willing to transact with the buyers. And this is what price is all about: ensuring incentives to sell/rent/lease. With enough sellers (but not necessarily everyone), the market will be competitive; there will be no monopoly. Many people seem to confuse "private property" with "monopoly;" not helpful. Please be careful when you use the term "monopoly;" make sure you can prove your case.
For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/
Current thread:
- IP: Re: Re: Response to David Reed David Farber (Aug 31)