SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Polly Cleveland)
Date:
Wed May 24 16:10:28 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
No question that allocators artificially INFLATE rents, by restricting the   
supply of spectrum. They give away spectrum or sell it cheaply to   
speculators. They don't pressure large broadcast companies to put their   
spectrum hoards to use. They also unnecessarily withhold large sections of   
spectrum, and limit the use of private spectrum as technology changes. See   
http://www.newamerica.net/Download_Docs/pdfs/Pub_File_808_1.pdf and other   
articles on the New America Foundation website.  
  
Do allocators CREATE rents? There's an efficiency argument for creating   
private titles to spectrum, just as there is for private land titles, oil   
leases, or fishing rights. Restricting access to a scarce natural resource   
does generate rent. Georgists argue that while it may be more efficient to   
leave titles in private hands, the rent can and should be returned to the   
public in the form of lease payments or taxes. If the Federal Government   
were to lease spectrum at market, or tax its market value, spectrum hogs   
would be forced to use it or sell it. Rents would plummet, but not disappear.  
  
Polly Cleveland  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2