iltering the massive amount of email this topic has
> generated.If i'm out of line,someone tell me. Regards ,Jason
>
>
> Sent From My PrimeCo Phone
>
> --- On Fri, 2/5/10, MDK wrote:
>
>
> From: MDK
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC&#x
I agree-I've worked for essential monopolies (like defense contractors). Or
maybe it's just big companies. In any case, the waste boggled my mind.
To be clear my natural tendency is to want to "own" a market. However, I also
recognize that you can't ever really do that, and if you do, no matter
On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 22:26 -0500, RickG wrote:
> Hitler. Just to name one of many!
Ok, folks...it's time to stop. We've reached the reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
--
* Butch Evans *
800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
>> +1 574-935-8484 x106 (Int'l)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _____
>>
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>> Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 3:35 PM
>
t;
>> _
>>
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>> Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 3:35 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in re
t;
> >
> > _
> >
> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> > Behalf Of Jack Unger
> > Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 3:35 PM
> > To: WISPA General List
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC
Then I fail your test. I dont want a monopoly. In th epast, I've worked for
both electric and phone companies and all it breeds is laziness and waste.
In competitive markets, I find the challenge invigorating. -RickG
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Matt Liotta wrote:
>
> On Feb 5, 2010, at 11:0
Chuck, In the past, I'd say 99% of our posts are in agreement so I suspect
we have the same thoughts here as well. I probably failed in not being more
clear due to lack of detail with my thoughts due to time constraints. The
context of my reply was in response to Jack's fear of big companies. Perha
war there will never be
peace.
Brad
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 11:28 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulat
The restraint is government. How do you restrain capitalism without the
restraint of laws, including those that restrain monopolies?
The implication of saying the only companies that have monopolies are the ones
that government gives monopolies to is that without government monopolies, and
with
Chuck, where did I say "unrestrained? The rest of my post is questions. So,
I agree with your reply in as much as that nobody should be unrestrained. As
far as history, to what do you refer to?
-RickG
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Chuck Bartosch wrote:
>
> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:34 AM, RickG wr
a.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 4:21 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
C'mon Jeff. There is NO NEED to accumulate power if you don't have excess
people.
jack
WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
C'mon Jeff. There is NO NEED to accumulate power if you don't have excess
people.
jack
Jeff Broadwick wrote:
> C'mon Jack, war is about trying to accumulate power, not
ught from those of us out here trying to live our lives and put
>
>
>
> food
>
>
>
> on the table and pay for the folly of it all.
>
>
>
> If we had a war tax and kids were being drafted, we'd all be involved,
>
>
>
> more
>
>
>
>
lf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 3:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Your statement is true when there is NOT enough food, clothing or shelter
for everybody.
But when there IS enough foo
Brad
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 11:28 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Good poi
ss-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 11:28 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Good points.
When I have to choose between guns (war) or butter
eless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 12:48 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation
of
> net-neutrality
>
>
> Just keep saying to yourself.
>
> 1. Overpo
every
> month down useless well.
>
> Just my crazy thoughts.
>
> Bob-
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Brad Belton
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 10:38 P
union or
>
> small local community bank. My money has been kept in a local community
>
> credit union for over 20 years and I feel good about it being there.
>
> It's contributing to the community instead of being used in an
>
> irresponsible fashion and/or used against
Yep, I agree with your statement (which was well put).
Chuck
On Feb 5, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Matt Liotta wrote:
>
> On Feb 5, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Chuck Bartosch wrote:
>
>> That statement completely ignores history. The tendency of any unconstrained
>> capitalist is to form a monopoly. Hell, *I'd
On Feb 5, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Chuck Bartosch wrote:
> That statement completely ignores history. The tendency of any unconstrained
> capitalist is to form a monopoly. Hell, *I'd* do it if I could ;-). And
> unconstrained capitalism that achieves a monopoly rarely acts in its
> customers own bes
On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:34 AM, RickG wrote:
> Jack, The only companies that "can do whatever they want to you whenever
> they want to do it" are the ones given a monopoly and power by guess who -
> big government! So, where is the problem? Is it the companies or the
> government?
That statement co
On Feb 5, 2010, at 9:02 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
make campaigns post their contributions on the
> internet.
That's already available if the donation is over $99.
Chuck
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://si
t; organization other than the government) does treat you unfairly you have
> recourse. If your own government treats you unfairly, you have little to
> no
> recourse.
>
>
>
> Yes, we can all only hope the majority of Americans will continue to
> stand
> up and say no more to
Jack, The only companies that "can do whatever they want to you whenever
they want to do it" are the ones given a monopoly and power by guess who -
big government! So, where is the problem? Is it the companies or the
government?
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Jack Unger wrote:
> So, now that g
ireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Robert West
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 8:55 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
I love it that they had the FCC step in to stop
ge-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Robert West
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 11:37 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
And me and my pack of
a.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org> ] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 3:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation
of
net-neutrality
So, now that go
: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 11:48 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Just keep saying to yourself.
1. Overpop
Having pastored in the nations poorest city I would far from disagree with you.
Folks that should have never been able to have a home were given the ability to
obtain loans -
That is an understatement.
The government has done all it can to push the idea that "if you rent - your a
failure"
They
g] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 12:58 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Thank God you're here!!
Can I please join the pack ??? :-[
Robert West wrote:
> And me and my p
ent forcing lenders to lend to unqualified
>> buyers.
>>
>>
>>
>> I can go on, but I get the feeling none of this makes any sense to you,
>> Jack. That's fine with me.there are those that do and those that.I don't
>> know.just coast along I guess?
>
PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Jack,
Your police analogy is flawed.
While it may take a larger police force to serve and insure the safety of a
larger population it does not take a
: Thursday, February 04, 2010 11:37 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
And me and my pack of highly trained Wispa Ninja warriors will be waiting
for them to thwart their plans of conquest!
ilto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 4:01 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
> net-neutrality
>
>
>
> So, now that government has b
makes any sense to you,
> Jack. That's fine with me.there are those that do and those that.I don't
> know.just coast along I guess?
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
>
>
> Brad
>
>
>
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] O
makes any sense to you,
> Jack. That's fine with me.there are those that do and those that.I don't
> know.just coast along I guess?
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
>
>
> Brad
>
>
>
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] O
ve
government
is what America needs. In order to achieve this we have to remove the
career politicians from office that have clearly lost touch with the
people
that elected them.
Brad
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org ] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thurs
uot;speech"
Bob-
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 5:48 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regul
>
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 8:56 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
> net-neutrality
: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
So, now that government has been drowned, the huge banks, insurance
companies, telecoms can do whatever they want to you whenever they want to
do it.
BWh, haaa, h, haaa, hh
Frank Cra
PA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Title II of the Communications Act-the section that regulates
telecommunications common carriers is now being considered by the FCC to
oversee broadband. FCC Commissioner Robert M. McDowell during a talk he
gave to
n
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 7:55 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Brad,
You are misunderstanding or ignoring what I've been saying so let's try it
again.
When you ha
nt. A smaller less intrusive
> government
> is what America needs. In order to achieve this we have to remove the
> career politicians from office that have clearly lost touch with the
> people
> that elected them.
>
>
>
> Brad
>
>
>
>
>
> From
ist
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Brad,
You are misunderstanding or ignoring what I've been saying so let's try it
again.
When you have more people crowded into the same space your are going to have
more frequent and mo
rly lost touch with the
people
that elected them.
Brad
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 3:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regula
riginal Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 4:48 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
Brad,
There is really onl
;> up and say no more to big government. A smaller less intrusive
>> government
>> is what America needs. In order to achieve this we have to remove the
>> career politicians from office that have clearly lost touch with the
>> people
>> that elected them.
>&g
g [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 3:01 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation
of
> net-neutrality
>
>
>
> So, now that govern
un...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 3:01 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
> net-neutrality
>
>
>
> So, now that government has been drowned, the huge bank
...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 3:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of
net-neutrality
So, now that government has been drowned, the huge banks, insu
So, now that government has been drowned, the huge banks, insurance
companies, telecoms can do whatever they want to you whenever they want
to do it.
BWh, haaa, h, haaa, hh
Frank Crawford wrote:
YES
Jack Unger wrote:
I trust that government will be able to
YES
Jack Unger wrote:
> I trust that government will be able to keep up just fine. Do you
> support the alternative of making government so small that you can drown
> it in a bathtub?
>
> Glenn Kelley wrote:
>
>> Title II of the Communications Act—the section that regulates
>> telecommunicat
No, but a whirlpool tub, yes.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
--
From: "Jack Unger"
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 9:39 AM
To: "WISPA General List"
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC
Glenn,
I think it's important not be be overly alarmist.
There is every reason to believe that Network Neutrality will allow and
encourage "reasonable network management" practices.
WISPA works responsibly with the FCC and with other governmental
agencies to be sure that they understand th
What happens if the government states you cannot block any content and or do
traffic shaping ... ?
Understand - the talk was to the Free State Foundation - who is against
virtually any blocking or traffic shaping
This being said- even the plans you may offer may be out of the window on the
oth
I trust that government will be able to keep up just fine. Do you
support the alternative of making government so small that you can drown
it in a bathtub?
Glenn Kelley wrote:
> Title II of the Communications Act—the section that regulates
> telecommunications common carriers is now being consi
Title II of the Communications Act—the section that regulates
telecommunications common carriers is now being considered by the FCC to
oversee broadband. FCC Commissioner Robert M. McDowell during a talk he gave
to the Free State Foundation asked: (see First Do No Harm: A broadband plan
for A
59 matches
Mail list logo
