Additionally, buy synthroid pills people may wish to consider their budget and whether the lumigan company offers a discount subscription. A doctor will first need without atrovent get prescription discount to diagnose EoE and rule out other conditions that may purchase discount tizanidine sale be causing any symptoms. Chemotherapy treatment involves injecting anticancer drugs levitra pills into a person's vein or administering them orally so they atenolol cost can enter the bloodstream to reach most parts of the order allopurinol from canada body. Often, they do not experience any symptoms and only buy glyburide without prescription find out following diagnostic testing after being unable to get purchase 60 online pregnant naturally. When in a public setting, is best to viagra in malaysia regularly wash hands or use hand sanitizer, especially after touching no prescription atrovent door handles, railings, buttons, and anything else people may have buy atenolol once daily touched. The Roman website states that all the doctors and celexa sale nurse professionals the company works with are healthcare professionals licensed buy generic diclofenac problems to practice in the U.S. A person working with one of.

The abominably misnamed “Fairness Doctrine” seems to be gathering steam for reinstatement. I have no political axe to grind here; I’m an information free-marketeer. Can you imagine any court going along with the proposition that by government regulation, editorial opinions in newspapers have to be politically balanced? Given the First Amendment, it is hard to think of anything more un-American.

The argument goes that the airwaves are different; they are public property and there are only so many to go around. As a national resource, they should be distributed “fairly,” so that a range of views can be heard.

There are so many things wrong with this argument from a purely philosophical point of view that it’s hard to know where to begin. Should truth and falsehood be equally represented, and if not, who is to decide whether someone’s claimed truth is actually false? Do Darwin and Usher get equal time to express their views on the age of the earth?

But the fundamental problem here is that spectrum scarcity, which is the premise for its nationalization and government control, is artificial. Chapter 8 explains the reasons, but my evidence could not be simpler. Hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of broadcast radio stations coexist around you right now. They are called cell phones. Modern radio technology is much more efficient than that of the 1930s when the present schemes for allocating broadcast licenses were legislated.

The case for the government to dictate content of radio broadcasts is very week philosophically, but without its technological foundation, it collapses completely.

This entry was posted on Thursday, February 12th, 2009 at 11:30 pm and is filed under Censorship and free speech, Radio and television, The role of government—laws and regulations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.