1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/13624/government-subsidies-for-bloggers/

Government Subsidies for Bloggers?

August 19, 2010 by

Professor Bollinger obviously distrusts our ability to make choices about the news we wish to read; he is eager to supplant our judgment with his. But who is so wise as to know what is good for all of us? FULL ARTICLE by Jeff Harding


czelaya August 19, 2010 at 11:02 am

As usual, the same rhetoric for failing enterprises that have not evolved with technologies. This is no different than the invention of the automobile, and how it triumphed over the horse buggy.

I take it the Columbia Unversity profressor didn’t read Economics In One Lesson.

J. Murray August 19, 2010 at 11:09 am

I suspect that many economics professors can’t read at all.

Magnus August 19, 2010 at 12:27 pm

LOL YEAH! he shood half red SUM peter shiff: How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes, the kanye vs hayek rap, and watch sum special eps of dora teh explorer fuhrer!! He really wud hav dun econ gewd den like all of us sewper ignorant laymen LOLOLOLROFLCOPPTEERRRE!

Magnus August 19, 2010 at 12:59 pm

Once again this impostor rears his ugly ass , I’m the real Magnus here .

Magnus August 19, 2010 at 1:07 pm

Sigh, once again that was the impostor trying to exonerate himself.

The Real Magnus August 19, 2010 at 2:14 pm

I think anyone who knows me through my posts would instantly recognize that I would not misuse commas and periods (by inserting spaces in front of them), nor use run-on sentences, nor would I begin a post with the word “sigh,” nor use words like “exonerate” incorrectly.

I am, in part, flattered that some random loser has decided to impersonate me, but if you are going to do so, please bring your grammar, syntax, punctuation and vocabulary up to at least middle-school standards, and, above all, try to say something interesting.

Magnus August 19, 2010 at 2:32 pm

There are three separate users named Magnus, who have been posting on this blog. I happen to be named Magnus in RL, so I would appreciate it, if you would not try to make reverse-psychological claims about my grammatical correctness.

The Real Magnus August 19, 2010 at 2:40 pm

Forgive me, my eponymous friend, but the tone of the original “LOL YEAH!” commenter led me to believe that all of the above Magnuses were one guy, trying to be funny.

I guess it’s time to get a new moniker.

Daniel August 19, 2010 at 11:45 pm

Will the real magnus, blog poster, please stand up?

Franklin August 19, 2010 at 11:21 am

“Both the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission are undertaking studies to ensure the steep economic decline faced by newspapers and broadcast news does not deprive Americans.”

How come I can never get on these gravy trains?

J. Murray August 19, 2010 at 11:27 am

How can people be deprived of newspapers when they clearly aren’t buying them now?

htran August 19, 2010 at 5:08 pm


mpolzkill August 19, 2010 at 5:11 pm

I don’t even want them dumped on my step for free.

Rick August 19, 2010 at 11:36 am

“…does not deprive Americans of the essential information they need as citizens.”

“…and foreign bureaus have been decimated… My best estimate is that there are presently only a few dozen full-time foreign correspondents from the U.S. covering all of China, despite the critical importance of that nation to our future.”

Americans are getting plenty of the information they need, and want. What’s becoming less popular is tripe from the mouth of someone like Bollinger and until the old dogs of “mainstream media” figure that out, they’ll continue to wither away into irrelevancy.

As for foreign bureaus supposedly being “decimated”, one could look upon that as an empire in decline. But there is plenty of good reporting on China on the Internet, just not necessarily from CBS, PBS, Fox, etc.

PBS news, or so-called “public broadcasting”, is nothing but an endless rotation of politicians, bureaucrats, partisan hacks, and the talking heads that apologize for them… come to think of it, the MSM isn’t much different… and Bollinger thinks taxpayers should pay for that? And he writes this during a depression and when government debt is beyond control? Bollinger should retire, think about his wasted life, and then fall on his sword.

AmesF August 19, 2010 at 11:57 am

Next step? Newsspeak.

Horst Muhlmann August 19, 2010 at 1:17 pm

Bollinger is like an artifact left over from the New Deal,

Right era, wrong country. I think Germany is more up Bollinger’s alley.

Franklin August 19, 2010 at 2:30 pm

“…Wickard v. Filburn…defined almost everything as ‘interstate commerce.’ ”

Until the interstate commerce clause is stricken from the Constitution, there is little hope for turning, or ever even stemming, the tide.

Eric August 19, 2010 at 3:26 pm

This is one of the clauses that was limited in the Confederate States version of the constitution. But with the twisted interpretations we’ve seen since, I wonder what this would have looked like today:

“3. To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes; but neither this, nor any other clause contained in the Constitution, shall ever be construed to delegate the power to Congress to appropriate money for any internal improvement intended to facilitate commerce; except for the purpose of furnishing lights, beacons, and buoys, and other aids to navigation upon the coasts, and the improvement of harbors and the removing of obstructions in river navigation; in all which cases such duties shall be laid on the navigation facilitated thereby as may be necessary to pay the costs and expenses thereof.”

J. Murray August 19, 2010 at 3:53 pm

The problem is that the framers were very specific in their wording. When they said State, they were specifically talking about the chosen government of that individual State. The term State is never used as a geographic locality in the Constitution. The issue is that the Commerce Clause only allows Federal regulation between the States, as in the political body called the State. As such, the Commerce Clause quite clearly does NOT grant authority to regulate commerce between anyone not specifically designated in the clause itself, meaning Congress does not have the power to regulate the commerce among the People as the People and the States are separate entities entirely. It sure as Hell didn’t mean controlling trade that crossed from one geopolitical region to another.

If Florida and Georgia want to engage in a trade of oranges for cotton, the Commerce Clause applies. If Bill in Florida wants to trade oranges for Ted in Georgia’s cotton, the Congress is not permitted anywhere near this transaction.

Of course, I agree with Franklin, it would be best to completely pull the Clause entirely and rewrite an amendment specifically banning Congress and individual States from any form of regulation.

Dave August 20, 2010 at 1:12 am

I wondered when they would get around to controling the internet. The MSM has very little left to offer anymore and people are starting to grow weary of “breaking news” that is centered around some starlets drug problem.

danq August 20, 2010 at 1:13 am

Reading the second quoted paragraph (“At the same time, however, the financial viability…”) resulted in a dozen “So?”‘s in my head

boniek August 20, 2010 at 3:47 am

First you subsidize them, then when fraud runs rampart you try to regulate them, and then when nothing works you take over them. Nothing helps of course but that is not the issue here. Nobody will pay better for/pour more money into those dinosaurs than state.

Phinn August 20, 2010 at 6:35 am

The State exists to force people to pay for the things they do not want.

geoih August 20, 2010 at 9:16 pm

Bollinger just can’t help himself. First he’s the face of state enforced racism (see the defendent in the last Supreme Court cases on affirmative action), now he’s the mouth piece for state censorship and propaganda. A true representative of the academic elite.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: