AT&T would pay city 5% in franchise-like agreement

[tencom]

Mark Strube

If the property owner has complete control over his domicile as you suggest they should have and the  govermment has no right to tell him or her how to use that right and can force every utility to negotiate a contract, for the placement of utility hardware with each landowner, what would be the alternative other then to use the street as the only viable right of way.
My  Point only applies to utilities so all citizens, can have access to services, that utilities, can provide and any ot of your other concerns,  such as shopping centers are inmaterial to this discussion.

[Mark Strube]

I only used eminent domain as an example of bad laws, and then you responded with the electric poles in the middle of the street thing. I wasn't saying eminent domain was the same as the gov't controlling a couple feet of your property... however I disagree with both.

[Doug Mohr]

I think he may have misunderstood my avatar/tag line.

I have had that ever since the Supreme Court ruled that the promise (not even a guarantee) of tax revenue from private developers satisfies the "for the public good" requirement of the constitution.

It is something I now ask all local political candidates during public Q&A sessions.

As for the poles in the middle of the street, that was a bit out there. My point was that the government already has right of way along every street, ranging from a few feet to over twenty feet. That allows ample room for utilities to place infrastructure. Since every household must be accessible from a public road (Fire Code) , every household can be serviced through the existing right of way.

I did talk to a friend who woks in Pole Management and mapping and in the City of Milwaukee, there is an easement along each public street and alley. If they cannot safely service the customer from either of those locations, the first step is to place a Private Property Pole on that customer's property. If that is not possible, then a utility easement is applied for and approved by default if no objection is made.

Now SBC and TW may have other procedures and I wasn't able to get any underground service information, but the pole policies seem quite reasonable IMHO.

[LuckySe7ens]

How can one have so much faith in government and so little faith in the free market? One consistently works, the other consistently screws things up.

Because there is no such thing as the "free market", it does not exist.

Companies exist because of laws saying they exist.  What allows this existence?    Government.  In the United States, what is government?  We the People.

So forgive me for having more faith in We the People than They the Privileged.

Corruption exists in Government, sure...  And should that be dealt with?  Of course.  But it also exists in Corporations.  And what's the difference?  The main concern of corporations is profit, they aren't accountable to We the People.  Since when is capitalism a political system?

I of course 100% agree when it comes to eminent domain, the government shouldn't be taking your house to allow a developer to build a shopping mall... but let's explore the issue of this so-called free market.  Sams Club pays their private police department $100,000,000 a year (Hey, you said this is a free market).  You pay them $5 a month.  Sams Club wants to take your house to build another location.  Your police department refuses to continue protecting you because Sams Club is offering the more money, and Sams Club sends their private army to forcefully turn over your property.  Who is your private police department accountable to?  The dollar.  Sounds like a stellar plan.

Damn, Government ain't looking so bad after all.

Same story over and over again.  Conservatives claim again and again government is the problem... and I'll agree with them to a point... it is, when they're in control.  They don't properly fund government programs, and then say "see, it doesn't work", and then they give a huge, no-bid contract to a private corporation.  (See Walter Reid, among many others).

[Mark Strube]

The free market exists in spite of the government. Supply and demand, competition, these are all some of the essential things that end up being in favor of the consumer.

Businesses do not exist because of laws saying that they do. They are not that nebulous. Sure the government puts needless hurtles in the way of starting a business such as licensing, but they do not exist thanks to the government. I believe you're confusing companies with corporations. Now corporations do exist thanks to government. This is the method of separating your personal finances from your business's finances, so if it goes down the tubes, you lose nothing. This is only possible with the protection and laws of government, and this is what has allowed the corporate corruption and being unaccountable to your customers that you speak of.

Now about your over the top Sam's club example... the government is already doing what you're talking about anyways, I'm sorry to say. THEY answer to the almighty dollar, wouldn't want to lose their federal funding! No matter how crummy of a job they do, they still get their funding no matter what... you can't choose not to pay taxes (according to them). The more they fail, the more money they get for that program, because look! It failed! It can't possibly be because government is incompetent, it's obviously the money, even though the private sector can always get the job done for half that money or less. Businesses (without the protection of the corporation) are forced to be answerable to both the dollar and their customers. It wouldn't look too good to their customers if Sam's club suddenly started going and forcefully taking people's homes. I'm quite sure in a situation like this, all kinds of competition would crop up "K-Mart... we don't steal your homes!" It just wouldn't last. In the case of government doing this, they have the force of guns and unlimited funds, answerable only to themselves. (Ever heard of an "internal investigation"? Yeah I bet those are consistently thorough.)

Finally, I'm not a "conservative"... or at least what the popular meaning of conservative is these days. I'm a Libertarian. All of these problems you talk about are still problems thanks to government control, which I want to get rid of. Government programs aren't worthless because of lack of funding... just take a look at any government program where, in another location, a completely private business is doing the same thing (and not because of some no-bid contract)... in every case you will find that the private business was more efficient, getting more done for much less money. Government programs are worthless because they're government programs. I'm not interested in "privatizing" allowing them to give no-bid contracts, because that still means some jerk "conservative" or jerk "liberal" is in "control"... they should allow the free market to flourish and get their fingers out of things that they have no right being in.

This is already way off topic, and my better moderator sensibilities would make me lock this thread, but I don't want it to look like I'm trying to get the last word or anything. So, if a higher up feels this should end, I'll let them take care of it.

[John L]

I was thinking the same thing, the thing is, maybe the city is entitled to a little cash since I think they own much of the infrastructure these systems are built upon. At the same time Gov. should not immediately seek ways to continue to get revenue from citizens if something comes along that might save us money.

If this is a way to keep Public Access TV in the community, meaning local citizens creating their own TV shows and putting them on the community TV station I am all for it.  I know many of you balk against Public Access TV, but my involvment with Muskego's Public Access TV ch. 14 is one I really enjoy and a great hobby in which I would miss terribly if it gets shut down.  I basically program the channel and the content and the way it is programmed pretty much fair closer to the regular broadcast channels.  I bit far better programmed and operated then the average Public Access TV channels.  Programming on it is very much like what airs on PBS, as well as horror movies hosted by Dr. Destruction's Crimson Theater out of Kenosha.

I surely hope that local governments don't loose franchise fees rights.  Since the cable is strung thru teh city and Time Warner is offering (they have to by law) pay the franchise fees, what exempts AT & T?

If there will be 2 or more cable TV services in Muskego, hopefully each one will carry MPAG-TV, whether on ch 14 or some other channel.

Same goes with the other access channels, the Muskego/Norway ch. 13 and Muskego Government ch. 25.

I should also speak for MATA in Milwaukee on channels 14 and 96. Ch 25 in Racine and Ch. 14 in Kenosha and many other communities.

-John L

[LuckySe7ens]

Such as to not take this thread further off topic, I'll link to a weird source considering my political views... but I'll admit it makes a good read, and leave it at that:

http://www.amconmag.com/2005_03_14/article1.html

[Mark Strube]

Whoever wrote this article needs to have a conversation with an intelligent Libertarian. Many of his points look like he just read a Wikipedia article about Libertarianism and then browsed a few crackpot websites the night before writing this article.

(He does make some good points, but those problematic ones stuck out like a sore thumb to me.)

I went ahead and posted the article on another forum... it's getting some interesting responses!

http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=12659.0

[Tom Snyder]

As long as this thread stays civil, you guys can take it as far off topic as you want.

[Doug Mohr]

As long as this thread stays civil, you guys can take it as far off topic as you want.

My cat's breath smeels like cat food. :wave: