The New York Times Entirely Misunderstands The FCC Spectrum Auction

[Commentary] You’ve got to hand it to the editorial board of the New York Times. They really do have a preternatural ability to grasp the wrong end of the economic or logical stick as we discuss what public policy should or might be. Their latest example is the two little discussions going on over in the broadband world. The first about network neutrality, the second about the auction that the FCC is undertaking over certain mobile frequencies. The New York Times celebrates that people will pay $38 billion for access to a scarce resource. The paper then also says that this isn’t a scarce resource that needs to be optimally allocated, it must be used on a come one come all basis. Either one of those ideas is supportable alone but to believe both I guess you’ve got to be a Very Serious Person.

[Tom Worstall is a Writer and Fellow at the Adam Smith Institute in London]