Oh, and you are welcome.
More on taxi's after this...
Because unlike print media, broadcast media is regulated by a governmental entity called the Federal Communications Commission. Once upon a time, the airwaves were considered public domain, and the purpose of the FCC was to ensure that they were used in the public interest. Yea, I know. Mainly because radio and television were invented after the 1st amendment was written. I would find it hard to believe that if our founding fathers could conceive of 'air waves', they would have exempted them from being free of government interference. In fact, I would think that since a community is served by far fewer print media, than broadcast, they would carry more weight.
And I know this might offend your capitalist sensibilities, but the public's right to know who the candidates are who running for the highest office in the land is infinitely more important than MacDonald's right to sell Big Macs. No, it doesn't offend my capitalist sensibilities. It more offends my sense of logic. I wonder, if you want 'free time' given to candidates, would you then object if candidates turned around and bought more time? Should every one be given their 15 min, and after that, their are on their own?
"Here you go, Mr. Noshot, chances are you wont get 100 votes nationally, but make your case, and see if any one wants to donate to your cause." Last I checked, MacDonald's still had to buy their advertising, I don't recall anyone saying that they should get it for free. If Micky D's buys and runs an ad, does that give Burger King, or Rally's right to demand equal time?
If stations are forced to provide free air time, where is that revenue made up? Who should be given the free time? The top 2, 3, 4, 5? In Florida, in 2000, there were 12 candidates for the 'highest office in the land'.
http://election.dos.state.fl.us/elections/resultsarchive/index.aspBush / Cheney(REP)
Gore / Lieberman(DEM)
Browne / Olivier(LIB)
Nader / LaDuke(GRE)
Harris / Trowe(SWP)
Hagelin / Goldhaber(LAW)
Buchanan / Foster(REF)
McReynolds / Hollis(SPF)
Phillips / Frazier(CPF)
Moorehead / La Riva(WWP)
Chote / Lancaster(WRI)
McCarthy / Beifus(WRI)
How many of those 12, are deserving the right to tell the voters about themselves? Who makes that call? What of the California recall, for the highest office in the state? Don't they deserve the right to free air time? The top 100, 200? After all, there's over 34 million people in that state, the election affects a lot of people's lives.
Unfortunately for all us, the FCC was hijacked in the 1980s by people like yourself who thought that promoting consumerism was greatest public good. Maybe, maybe not. I prefer to think that
the press refers to more than the printed word. Go figure.
So to hell with something as trivial as presidential campaigns. Do what's important, Obey your thirst, drink Sprite, and go have some Dippin' Dots cause they're crazy crazy cool. Yes, because we all know, that for the ONLY way for a candidate to get his message out, is by having the police arm of the government to give him the chance, for free.
Now, for taxis.
Since taxi's are licensed, and operate over public roadways, does it not serve the public good if we require them to donate a small percentage of their trips for the public? If, say for example, a person was ill, and needed a trip to the hospital, but not sick enough to require a ambulance and a EMT, why not require the closest hack to pick up that person and carry them to the nearest hospital? For Free, of course.
Same principle, way I see it. The driver pays for his own gas, insurance, vehicle maintenance, yet used public road ways to make his money. He is licensed by the DBR, or the equivalent, and as such, is subject to the regulations put forth by the government body.