Well, my friend, that's an entitlement. The market is able to provide phone service without commercial calls. My cell phone company for example sued a commercial spammer who misused their network. But you want a cheaper land line service with the same feature that I pay more for. So you lobbied and had it given to you.
I understand your hypocrisy, those calls got on everybody's nerves (including mine), so why not make an exception to your anti-state principles in this one case? I made an exception myself when I approved of the FL legislature intervening between a husband and wife in a "right-to-die" case. I decided that her life outweighed the negative effects of such legislation. We all have to make decisions like that and we need to understand and accept them and not try to rationalize it with tortured analogies and applications of law.
Telemarketing could probably be banned altogether, but I don't support doing that. I do support giving people an out.
The market is able to provide phone service without commercial calls. My cell phone company for example sued a commercial spammer who misused their network
You're assuming everyone wants to go wireless and not have a land line. Your solution here is to allow telemarketers to kill off another industry through their abusive behavior. Talk about entitlement,
But you want a cheaper land line service with the same feature that I pay more for. So you lobbied and had it given to you.
You want to allow a small group (call it 2.6 million) to force a much larger group of people (50+ million) to change their lives, or pay more money for their phone service, just so that smaller group can keep engaging in commercial activity that the much larger group does not want to be part of.
At the end of the day, the telemarketing industry has nobody but itself to blame for this. I'm not shedding any tears over them.
The market is able to provide barbed-wire fences and private security guards. But you want a cheaper house with police protection. So you lobbied and had it given to you.