Help Save Net Neturality!

[ClckwrkOra]

Originally Posted by LicensetoKill [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

You haven't looked at the numbers.

Facebook played 10.9% taxes on their income.

Apple, which is incorporated in Ireland due to a loophole, probably pays even less.

[Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

[Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

[Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

[Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

A guy who makes 50 K a year pays over twice that. I don't think any reasonable person thinks that it's OK if facebook pays a lower tax rate than the person who waits tables or drives a cab, but the problem is, if you fix that, facebook's stock drops and people have kittens. We so desperately don't want the stock market to drop that we accept a bogusly unbalanced tax system. I don't want stocks to drop, but I know a crooked system when I see one. You should too.

The American revolutionists primary objection wasn't the taxes, it was the lack of representation, so your 2nd point holds no water as well.

The Enron scandal is an example of ow crooked business can be - people like you want to cut government power and give it to business, I'm just trying to warn you that your approach is dangerous and Enron is just one example. The investment banks created the mortgage crisis. That was a pretty big problem.

Now, I have no idea where you came up with "the left wants to believe every corporate entity is the spawn of satan" because I certainly don't believe that, so, I'd like you to stop making thins up. There is a danger though. Without regulation, corporations can be tempted to cut corners to get an edge over their competition. They'll cut corners in safety or cleanliness of production to produce a cheaper product and make more money and the free market doesn't have an answer to that - it really doesn't. Regulation isn't always bad, it can keep corporations in line. It can prevent putting toxins in our water table or lead in our gasoline.

I don't "Love our government" that's silly, but I see it as the lesser of the evils. I'm a big fan of supporting the lesser of the evils. We should respect the benefit of good government, not constantly push for smaller government. That's a recipe for disaster. What has the government over-regulated that's affected you personally?

Added after 12 minutes:



I'm going to play devil's advocate here. I don't think they have time to police everything we see, so I don't think censoring/filtering websites is a big issue. I don't imagine it's to AT&T's benefit to block message boards from loading, and I think they might face complaints and lose customers if they did.

I think companies like Megasync have the most to lose because their entire business is based on cheap sharing of large files. Or, maybe they charge a little more and get by just fine. I think advertisers might buy fast time and we'd see more intrusive advertising without net neutrality, but I don't think that would kill the internet, though it might slow it down. AT&T will make more money billing Netflix for fast streaming service and your netflix bill will go up 10% - to me, that's not a big deal.

I don't see ending Net Neutrality as the evil that many people do. I'm not gung ho for the other side either. There may be a devil in the details, but I haven't looked close enough to find him.

I do find the congressional divide rather funny. It's an entirely partisan issue in the senate. No question, it's right down party lines with a couple of the usual suspects of the republican party voting with team D. Other issues scare me much more than this one.

The issue is that seven companies provide 95 percent of broadband access to the Internet in the U.S.

Comcast in 2014 throttled back Netflix’s streaming speeds to make Netflix pay to deliver its films to consumers.

What stops broadband companies from doing the same thing to adult sites?

[ours01]

Originally Posted by Zweig [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

For US citizens of the forum,

Tomorrow the Senate will be voting on whether to save net neutrality or let it die. If net neutrality dies the cable companies will gain huge control over your Internet access. You absolutely need to take 5 minutes to write to your senator, for your personal benefit and for the good of mankind. Here's more information on what can be done and how: [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register] - you can easily call, email and tweet to your senators through the website.

IF you are not from the US, show your support of net neutrality by signing this petition: [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

I have signed! Thanks Stefan

Please remember to vote and polititians who are willing to defend peoples rights and not dumpasses who defends right of powerfull people and entreprises!

[brsimmons]

No net neutrality in New Zealand, among some other countries.

[LicensetoKill]

Originally Posted by ClckwrkOra [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

The issue is that seven companies provide 95 percent of broadband access to the Internet in the U.S.

Comcast in 2014 throttled back Netflix’s streaming speeds to make Netflix pay to deliver its films to consumers.

What stops broadband companies from doing the same thing to adult sites?

You may be right (and I did say 'Devil's advocate). I haven't entirely wrapped my head around this issue. I know that a lot of people have strong opinions on this. I'm still mostly ignorant on this issue, and being ignorant, not with a strong opinion either way.

[ClckwrkOra]

Originally Posted by LicensetoKill [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

You may be right (and I did say 'Devil's advocate). I haven't entirely wrapped my head around this issue. I know that a lot of people have strong opinions on this. I'm still mostly ignorant on this issue, and being ignorant, not with a strong opinion either way.

I'm not throwing you under the bus, guy. I'm just trying to let you know where the pothole is.

When a few firms control a market -- as is true in broadband access -- bad things happen.

Thus, government regulation.

Originally Posted by ClckwrkOra [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

I'm not throwing you under the bus, guy. I'm just trying to let you know where the pothole is.

When a few firms control a market -- as is true in broadband access -- bad things happen.

Thus, government regulation.

Do you have any support for this? Citations please, and not from Wikipedia. Also, there are already antitrust regulations in place to protect the consumer from price fixing, monopolizing, and other market manipulations so I'm not sure where you're coming from.

Added after 15 minutes:

Originally Posted by ClckwrkOra [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

The issue is that seven companies provide 95 percent of broadband access to the Internet in the U.S.

Comcast in 2014 throttled back Netflix’s streaming speeds to make Netflix pay to deliver its films to consumers.

What stops broadband companies from doing the same thing to adult sites?

You do realize that "speed" is a relative term and there is a limit to transmission speeds within any given backbone vs a virtually UNLIMITED amount of demand. So yeah, not everything is going to be treated equally. That's just basic economics, supply and demand and scarcity of resources. The demand is rising faster than the infrastructure can keep up with. In a perfect world, every one would get everything that everyone else has but it just ain't reality and government is not going to change that.

[freestylefan]

This issue has now gone to the House, I believe

[homerj2100]

Originally Posted by Zweig [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

Here's an nformative video on the subject

This video is extremely misleading and it's meant to appeal to people like you that have 0 clue what they're talking about

The FTC regulated the internet prior to 2015
The FCC tried to take control in 2015, by classifying ISP as common carriers
The laws the FCC wanted to implement NEVER went into effect
Let me say that part again THE "net neturality FCC" never existed and nothing is changing
The FTC will continue to regulate the internet and the anti-trust laws that have been on the books for over 100 years in the states won't change
The internet in the US won't change
This petition is meaningless.

[ClckwrkOra]

Originally Posted by G-Force [Only Registered Users Can See LinksClick Here To Register]

Do you have any support for this? Citations please, and not from Wikipedia. Also, there are already antitrust regulations in place to protect the consumer from price fixing, monopolizing, and other market manipulations so I'm not sure where you're coming from.

Added after 15 minutes:






You do realize that "speed" is a relative term and there is a limit to transmission speeds within any given backbone vs a virtually UNLIMITED amount of demand. So yeah, not everything is going to be treated equally. That's just basic economics, supply and demand and scarcity of resources. The demand is rising faster than the infrastructure can keep up with. In a perfect world, every one would get everything that everyone else has but it just ain't reality and government is not going to change that.

Trump fanboys heart oligopolies. Dang.

First, examples of oligopolies causing harm:

1. When large movie studios also owned theaters, they conspired to set minimum admission prices that people paid to see films. (U.S. vs. Paramount Pictures, Inc., 334 U.S. 131 (1948).)

2. When three large companies controlled the tobacco industry, they conspired to fix prices for raw materials used in making cigarettes. (American Tobacco et al. v. U.S. et al., 328 U.S. 781 (66 S. Ct. 1125, 90 L.Ed. 1575).

3. Visa and MasterCard barred member banks from issuing credit cards from American Express and Discover. (U.S. vs. Visa et al., 02-6074, Second Circuit Court of Appeals.)

Nearly a third of industries are “highly concentrated” under current federal antitrust standards, compared with roughly 25 percent in 1996. (Wall Street Journal, Gerard Hoberg and Gordon Phillips of University of Southern California, 2015.)

Consolidation may be why some businesses produce returns 10 times the median, versus three times in the early 1990s. Worse, this may be the reason for growing wealth inequality, as execs and investors make so much more than everyone else. (“A firm-level perspective on the role of rents in the rise of inequality,” Jason Furman and Peter Orszag, Columbia University, 2015.)


Now, antitrust vs. net neutrality:

As an opponent of net neutrality noted in a recent paper, antitrust won’t stop ISPs from discriminating when prioritizing some packets over others. The reason: It may discriminate, but it doesn’t rise to an antitrust offense. (Hal Singer, “Paid prioritization and zero rating: Why antitrust cannot reach the part of net neutrality everyone is concerned about.” Antitrust Source, August 2017.)

Antitrust litigation costs a bundle to pursue, and it takes forever, even if you win the hard-to-prove cases, Singer notes. Federal agencies rarely antitrust cases.


Finally, about discriminatory treatment of web traffic:

With little in the.way of choices for broadband providers, you will be fine with providers blocking/slowing down services like Skype, Netflix and Hulu.

You won’t mind if they do this to steer you to their versions of these services. Nor will you mind if those services cost you more and/or give you less of what you’re looking for.

You certainly won’t care if your broadband provider charges you more to access adult content that you now get for free or low cost.

And it won’t bug you in the slightest if, as they’ve done previously, broadband providers restrict or ban new technologies. (Tim Wu, “Network neutrality, broadband discrimination,” Journal on Telecommunications and High Technology Law, 2003.)

[psf366]

Of course everyone is entitled to their opinions but why the angry backlash against the idea of safeguarding an essential service? This debate here is between a small handful of giant tech companies versus everyone in America who uses the internet. I mean, it's not like net neutrality regulations might hurt some local mom and pop ISP in rural Kansas. The worst possible outcome here is some giant corporations won't be as tremendously profitable as they'd like to be. (My apologies to any of you guys whose stock portfolios depend on Verizon or Comcast.) So why all the upset?

Yes, I know the answer -- the government stinks. It always ruins everything it touches and you really wish it would just go away. Well, I'll agree our government is imperfect. But the alternative isn't to simply trust giant corporations will "do the right thing." The real answer isn't LESS government but BETTER government. Corporations are great at defending themselves. Who speaks for the needs of people? The people do. Elect representatives with good ideas. Sign petitions. Civil society doesn't create itself. And I thank you, Zweig, for trying to remind us all of that simple fact.