Net neutrality advocates said they are gearing up for a legal fight after abandoning attempts to convince the U.S. Federal Communications Commission to keep 2015 rules aimed at maintaining an open internet.
I haven’t heard from anyone that thinks net neutrality rules should be abandoned. I hope they win this fight and keep the rules in place.
You haven’t been listening then. They absolutely should be abandoned. In fact even if you support NN, you should oppose Title II regulations. Why? First, they allow completely government control of the internet. Second, they actually allow companies to do the thing NN supporters fear: allow companies to do whatever they want with their connections. You need to do a lot more research.
I think Commissioner Pai is doing the right thing. Too much govenment control of anything is usually bad. It seems to me that the FTC is a more appropriate regulating body. Any litigation would take a long time, anyway. So in that period, the effects of this repeal could be observed and could very well make expensive litigation prove to be fruitless when the courts ultimately find for the defendant.
Allowing carriers to do whatever they want with their connections is exactly the problem.
Allowing carriers to do whatever they want with their connections is exactly the problem.
<
blockquote>Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
!da270d:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleCashDesignCareerPartTimeJobs/get/hourly… ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::!da270uuuu
I disagree that its a problem, but if you agree with that, then you should also oppose Title II NN regulations, because they allow exact that.
Only if you believe restraints on the likes of Comcast and Verizon is a bad thing.
Antitrust regulations have always been intended to do exactly the opposite, and before agencies like the FCC were run by industry lobbyists, they did the job that consumers needed them to do. Perhaps you’re not old enough to have experienced those decades.
Libertarian apologists’ reliance upon the wisdom and beneficence of industry cartels will not improve service or pricing.
Which I do.
Actually they haven’t. Regulations usually only keep competitors out, because they ALWAYS get captured but the industries they are supposed to regulate.
That’s irrelevant.
No, we rely upon a free market to provide alternatives. Which always works out better than government driven policies. We don’t rely on cartels, because they wouldn’t exist.
“Free market” is a myth. There’s nothing “free” about a sector that is essentially controlled by two or three big players. Unrestrained M&As, fewer alternatives every year.
Your deliberate dismissal of historical precedent tells me that your memory on this sort of regulation is willfully short, and you’re filling in the gaps by quoting from an industry playbook.
Its not a myth at all. You are right, there is nothing free about that. But you know why there is only two or three big players in a sector? Government regulations. They raise the cost of doing business, and only big companies can handle it. Remove the regulations, and more companies can complete.
Actually, your deliberate dismissal of historical facts shows my your memory on this sort of regulation is willfully short and you are filling in the gaps by quoting from a government playbook.
I’ve read the history and the regulations, and make up my own mind. Maybe you need to do that.
Remarkable dogma. I expect we’ll have another nice talk when Sprint gets acquired.
Allowing carriers to do whatever they want with their connections is exactly the problem.
Matt you show exactly the same type of left-brain, simple-minded thinking here as about “pro” machines. You accept arbitrary rules and ignore anything that intrudes on the perfect simplicity of your worldview.
This fantasy that somehow the market is perfect and everything will sort itself out is bullshit.
Markets are excellent but imperfect mechanisms and I would suggest you read some good literature from the opposing viewpoint, because you seem to be suffering from a very bad case of confirmation bias.
If you suggest I do the same, I have. In fact I pretty much thought as you do when I was much younger and equally prone to accept this appealingly simple, presumably cohesive, but enormously flawed branch of economic fundamentalism.
I like the fact that you said too much government control of anything is usually bad, rather than government control in general is inherently bad.
I would love it if conservative-minded folks would not attach themselves to the extreme viewpoints and instead use their influence to address the very real waste and excessive control that undoubtedly does exist while acknowledging that a democratic government does have a role to play in organizing an efficiently functioning society.
I feel strongly that anybody at either extreme on this particular spectrum is almost certainly misguided.
LOL NOPE!
I never said the market is perfect. Its imperfect, and there are losers. There are ways to help them, but not via the government. Because that’s a worse solution.
I constantly read from both sides of the debate, and I have zero confirmation bias. I think you need to read some good literature from the opposing viewpoint, because it seems like you have a very severe case of confirmation bias based on your reaction to my comments. You said you have, but I doubt it.
Its very simple and very cohesive, and not flawed at all. The other sides are extremely flawed, because they make assumptions and ignore plenty of facts.
The free market isn’t perfect, but its the best solution we have.