Note: This first appeared in the Daily Caller.
On December 1, 2010, AT&T and T-Mobile announced their plans to merge.
The Barack Obama Administration, its Democrat cohorts and the Media Marxist media “reform” groups spent all of 2011 in vociferous opposition to the proposed free market transaction.
The Administration’s Eric Holder-led Justice Department sued to block it.
The Administration’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski publicly asserted his opposition.
Myriad Congressional Democrats were opposed.
The Media Marxist public-disinterested groups gathered together in their tiny gaggle to block.
And on December 19, 2011 - more than a year after the merger was first announced – the anti-free market Left won. AT&T withdrew their merger application.
-----
Again, why the federal government holds such multi-branch, multi-jurisdictional sway over the Internet and telecommunications sector remains beyond us. The government has far more power to block or impede an AT&T-T-Mobile merger than they do a Wal-Mart-K-Mart merger. (A dichotomy that must be resolved – to bring the Tech sector into more-free market line with the rest of the private sector.)
And as we have repeatedly said, this abusive, endless “review” process is not a theoretical free market problem – it is a real free market problem.
Deutsche Telekom, T-Mobile’s parent (company), has made it clear, in congressional testimony, directly to the FCC, and in numerous public statements, that it will not continue to invest in T-Mobile USA. A stand-alone T-Mobile will not make capital expenditures of billions of dollars….
The Left impeding and outright blocking these free market transactions costs these companies billions of dollars. And it (thusly) costs real Americans real jobs.
T-Mobile USA, Inc. announced Thursday it will consolidate its call center operations from 24 to 17 facilities by the end of June….
…This consolidation effort will result in 1,900 net job reductions.
For over a year, T-Mobile basically said they would be forced to fire people if the merger was not approved.
And the Left didn’t listen. Because they remain stridently impervious to facts – and stridently wedded to their anti-free market ideology.
And now 1,900 people are out of work – sacrificed on the Left’s anti-capitalism ideological altar.
Think we’re exaggerating the job-loss connection to the blocked merger?
“I guess it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know the company has been struggling in the marketplace,” (Roger Lee, executive director of Economic Development for Central Oregon) said, pointing to AT&T’s failed effort to acquire T-Mobile as a possible nail in the coffin of Redmond (Oregon) and the other call centers.
“We understood from the acquisition they (AT&T) probably were going to maintain their employment call centers,” if the acquisition had been successful, Lee said…
“So the fact that didn’t happen, it’s not necessarily an unexpected result.”
We’re not exaggerating.
-----
Which brings us to a currently pending Tech sector free market transaction - Verizon’s spectrum purchase from a cable company consortium.
Which is – like was the AT&T-T-Mobile merger – stuck in government multi-branch, multi-jurisdictional “review” suspended animation.
Where it is – like was the AT&T-T-Mobile merger – being beaten like a piñata by the aforementioned usual Leftist suspects.
Will the lesson of these 1,900 fired souls be learned by these anti-free market zealots?
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know the answer to that question.
Comment
Comment by Theodore R. Pfrimmer on March 26, 2012 at 5:58pm As usual there is two sides to nearly every situation, I, as a T-Mobile user am very glad they did not merge. I had been an AT&T clint earlier, but left them because of very poor custumer service. I am happy with T-Mobile as they are.
Comment by Jeff Waller on March 26, 2012 at 5:00pm Any time corporations want to merge and the result does not create a monopoly, it is a good thing. The affected companies are most often able to operate more efficiently because of all phases of business management merges the most completely. The result is a stronger corporation, less top-heavy. They are usually less burdened by need for office space...less overhead and less debt, and the majority of workers benefit from having a more financially-secure employer.
Whenever government steps in and blocks such a legitimate merger, the true and very real affect on the economy is that which results from meddlesome government planning, driven only by politics and opinion. Without saying it, government is telling companies what they can produce, at what prices, and that they are viewing the workers as the means to their (government's) desired ends.
Centralized planning is socialism. Socialism is bad for capitalism and profits. Socialism is bad for freedom because planning, being at its heart, limits individual freedoms by obliging the worker to whatever work assignment the planners see fit.
Government, stepping in to block changes in the free market that are obviously good for the free market, is planning in its worst light. At least, when planners assign jobs to individuals in a socialistic society, they are presumed to have the nation's interest at heart. But when there is no valid reason, and assignment is made on such a grand scale, there is no logic to it, and can only be political in nature.
Comment by Guard Welsh on March 26, 2012 at 2:22pm In my opinion this president and congress do not care one ioda about the country or the people ine it. We have done nothing but go backwards since Obama was elected. I blame him getting in office on the Republicans and Independants more than the Democrates because he said what he was going to do and nobody was listening and still knowing this was truly the lesser of two evils so many stayed home saying there was no one to vote for. The worse thing is they are still just as stupid. I have heard a lot of people saying they would write in or stay home if Mitt gets the nomination. Well a blind person can see who's going to get it. What scares me is all these idiots staying home and in effect ellecting scumbama and his buddies again. As for AT&T and T Mobil I have to agree with the author there is something with the admin that they don't want a tech merger. It would not hurt anything as far as the customers. If they didn't like it they have a lot of others they can go to. The same with Standard Oil Co. going with Texco and Mobil. Big deal. There are others out there and if you don't like that company use another. Wether it will effect research or exploration needs to be seen if we ever get a congress that care enough about the country to let it happen. The only type of merger I have a problem with is one like Boing and Mc Donald Dougles. That took us to only one aircraft mfgr in this country. We no longer have any internal compition it has to be done with outside compaines and that could and has ment the loss of jobs and business here. However, that means nothing to our ignorant leaders.
Comment by Walter Bowen on March 26, 2012 at 2:16pm "SEVERE TOTAL STUPID LUNACY!"
Comment by John Bruce Tate on March 26, 2012 at 1:31pm Seems like we have no representation except for left wing socialist commies in the white house and congress.
Comment by Nevadastu on March 26, 2012 at 1:21pm Let's try to remember back to 1984 when Reagan broke up the AT&T monstrosity, creating competition in the telecommunications industry, and launching the greatest economic and technology boom in history. Why do we want these mega corporations to merge? All it does is stifle competiton. Why did the Clinton administration allow Exxon and Chevron to merge with Mobil and Texaco? Wouldn't it be better now if we still had the big 4 competing for market share? I don't agree with Seton Motley's assessment on the topic of mega-mergers.
Comment by USARogue on March 26, 2012 at 1:09pm Once again, let me submit part of the report by the European Central Bank regarding the effect of big government on growth.
…we analyse a wide set of 108 countries composed of both developed and emerging and developing countries, using a long time span running from 1970-2008, and employing different proxies for government size… Our results show a significant negative effect of the size of government on growth. …Interestingly, government consumption is consistently detrimental to output growth irrespective of the country sample considered (OECD, emerging and developing countries).`(emphasis mine)
Remember, this is from the European Union that Obama so cherishes as his blueprint for America.
Now, here is an excerpt from, the Conservative British Member of European Parliament, Daniel Hannan's speech at CPAC in February,,,
You look at the reforms being undertaken by this Administration, they are not a series of random initiatives that have just been latched together accidentally, they amount to a comprehensive policy of "Europeanisation": European healthcare, European day care, European college education, European nuclear disarmament, European carbon taxes, the whole package. And I tell you, when you adopt those things, you don't just become like any other country, you become less prosperous, less independent, less democratic and less free. We are at the end of the road that you have just set out along. We're screeching towards the cliff. And a couple of us, a very small number of us in the Parliaments of Europe are trying desperately to jam the brakes on while there's still time. And you know what, we look up and what do we see in our rear view mirror? We see you trying to overtake us, accelerating frantically in the direction that we have been going. My friends, there is still time to turn aside.
Obama is a European Socialist. When Europe warns us of their failures how can we ever justify to ourselves, or our children, that we should follow?
ABO (Anybody but Obama) 2012
OMG (Obama Must Go) 2012
Comment by Dorris Ponstingl on March 26, 2012 at 1:00pm JUST WHO in the WHITE HOUSE is AMERICAN????????? If they haven't turned socialist ,WHY are they letting this happen???????? All the true Citzension K now about Barack and how he got into the White House and know why he is still in ,with all that is known about him makes you stop and think ,Are we going to have a bloody war to get him and his COHORTS OUT???????????
He has to know how people got others leaders of their leaders out ,do we have to do a Gadafi to prove we are serious????????
Comment by Bryon Harrelson on March 26, 2012 at 12:46pm Obama is a Marxist and has been for many years according to a lot of people that have known him for many years.
Comment by Debrajoe Smith-Beatty on March 26, 2012 at 12:39pm It is much easier to control scared, hungry and desperate people.
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!
Join Tea Party Nation