5 ms·

Though this strongly contrasting view is not mainstream by any measure.

wuliwong 9y ago
I think the Austrian school is considered legitimate school of economics though, right? It's not like these are amateur economists or anything.
- wavefunction 9y ago
  I didn't say it's not a legitimate school of economics. I have 'The Road to Serfdom' sitting on my bookshelf among other works by members of the school. However I did claim that the thought that EM spectrum should be privatized is not a mainstream one. I imagine the more general idea that all public spaces and goods should be private is even less mainstream in the US, given the popularity of public roads, schools, parks etc.
- wuliwong 9y ago
  @wavefunction I can't comment on your last message (I guess to prevent flamewars?), hopefully this doesn't get too confusing to follow. My understanding of the argument is that EM frequencies in a geography are a limited resource and therefore are best treated as property with "homesteading" giving the initial claim to that property. (Which re-reading what you wrote, I think you understand) The first time I heard that argument, I found it quite interesting. And in fact, I shared it because it appears not to be mainstream but well worth a look IMO. I do disagree with your characterization of the general discussion. I think parks and radio frequencies on the whole are treated differently by the govt. There are govt owned frequencies of radio which would be like a public park but I believe this discussion is more about the regulation of the private radio frequencies. There are lots of private frequencies, they are just distributed and regulated by the FCC. The question as I see it is would it have been better to let "homesteading" distribute the initial ownership or the FCC?
  - wavefunction 9y ago
    I certainly encourage you to post anything thoughtful or personally resonant, especially as it is not my place nor my intent to police what ideas folks enjoy or discuss here or elsewhere. One could easily bring up some communist or even anarchist arguments for treatment of the EM band but they're definitely not mainstream either. I don't personally subscribe to the homesteading concept due to the frequent historical problems with real-world examples of 'homesteading' resources. On the one hand, I can recognize that the freedom to stake a claim on 'public' resources drove a huge amount of innovation and productivity in the American West. With it though came plenty of degradation, destruction and misuse as well. And one might even argue that it was only there to be homesteaded because the original inhabitants and their traditional cultures had been suppressed with force. And the US Federal government has privatized public lands for things like military bases and Land Grant Universities just as it has with bands of the EM spectrum for emergency responders or other governmental uses. For the closest analog to public parks I'd look at the shortwave bands or ham radio operators. Even there, as in public parks, there are regulations on behavior. It's an interesting discussion and in a more egalitarian world I might be more amenable to the view expressed by the original article. But today I look with deep suspicion on folks advancing the view that public goods should be privatized, due to what I consider a very irrational minority of people whose interests are purely selfish despite their claims to the contrary. Some folks wrap themselves in an ideology but really only seek to serve themselves.

I think the Austrian school is considered legitimate school of economics though, right? It's not like these are amateur economists or anything.

wavefunction 9y ago
I didn't say it's not a legitimate school of economics. I have 'The Road to Serfdom' sitting on my bookshelf among other works by members of the school. However I did claim that the thought that EM spectrum should be privatized is not a mainstream one. I imagine the more general idea that all public spaces and goods should be private is even less mainstream in the US, given the popularity of public roads, schools, parks etc.
wuliwong 9y ago
@wavefunction I can't comment on your last message (I guess to prevent flamewars?), hopefully this doesn't get too confusing to follow. My understanding of the argument is that EM frequencies in a geography are a limited resource and therefore are best treated as property with "homesteading" giving the initial claim to that property. (Which re-reading what you wrote, I think you understand) The first time I heard that argument, I found it quite interesting. And in fact, I shared it because it appears not to be mainstream but well worth a look IMO. I do disagree with your characterization of the general discussion. I think parks and radio frequencies on the whole are treated differently by the govt. There are govt owned frequencies of radio which would be like a public park but I believe this discussion is more about the regulation of the private radio frequencies. There are lots of private frequencies, they are just distributed and regulated by the FCC. The question as I see it is would it have been better to let "homesteading" distribute the initial ownership or the FCC?
- wavefunction 9y ago
  I certainly encourage you to post anything thoughtful or personally resonant, especially as it is not my place nor my intent to police what ideas folks enjoy or discuss here or elsewhere. One could easily bring up some communist or even anarchist arguments for treatment of the EM band but they're definitely not mainstream either. I don't personally subscribe to the homesteading concept due to the frequent historical problems with real-world examples of 'homesteading' resources. On the one hand, I can recognize that the freedom to stake a claim on 'public' resources drove a huge amount of innovation and productivity in the American West. With it though came plenty of degradation, destruction and misuse as well. And one might even argue that it was only there to be homesteaded because the original inhabitants and their traditional cultures had been suppressed with force. And the US Federal government has privatized public lands for things like military bases and Land Grant Universities just as it has with bands of the EM spectrum for emergency responders or other governmental uses. For the closest analog to public parks I'd look at the shortwave bands or ham radio operators. Even there, as in public parks, there are regulations on behavior. It's an interesting discussion and in a more egalitarian world I might be more amenable to the view expressed by the original article. But today I look with deep suspicion on folks advancing the view that public goods should be privatized, due to what I consider a very irrational minority of people whose interests are purely selfish despite their claims to the contrary. Some folks wrap themselves in an ideology but really only seek to serve themselves.