• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality [W:23]

Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Yes they are a great example, hence the birth of Satellite radio. When there is a demand there is someone who will find a solution. It may take a while but it will be found.

Satellite radio did not circumvent the frequency issue. Satellite communications are also regulated for exactly the same reason as terrestrial radio.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Cable is only one way to get television or internet. It happens to be the BEST way, which is why it dominates. My speeds have skyrocketed, FYI. That's why Comcast dominates here.

None of which disproves the point I'm making. There are technical and physical limitations that make DSL or satellite internet an inherently inferior product. Not exactly a stellar argument you're making for cable companies being a free and open market.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

And of course you understand that recognizing the existence and supporting that right doesn't mean that you can't disagree with the decision made, right?

But not with the "freedom of speech" excuse since there is no freedom of speech. But isn't that what all the imbeciles were screaming? The only way you can disagree with the pseudo-firing of Roberts is to say you agree with his bigoted, Taliban-like religous views. At least you are being honest then.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

None of which disproves the point I'm making. There are technical and physical limitations that make DSL or satellite internet an inherently inferior product. Not exactly a stellar argument you're making for cable companies being a free and open market.

Ah, so its a monopoly if your competitors make inferior products?
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Satellite radio did not circumvent the frequency issue. Satellite communications are also regulated for exactly the same reason as terrestrial radio.

It added more stations, which it the entire point if you are talking about how limited the frequencies are. Then came HD radio adding the ability to have even more stations. Who knows what will come next but it the demand is there you can bet something will come along.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

No, it doesn't. Because Comcast owns all the lines in your neighborhood so anyone wanting to "compete" has to go through them anyway.

They own the lines but NOT the land on which it's on. If you own some land, do I have the ability to dig it up or put up poles on it to run my own cables without you having any say in it?

That's essentially what Comcast is saying, and it makes no sense from a free market perspective.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

And yet perhaps it will only require a few miles of wire at some point as opposed to the millions of miles in the current infrastructure. The demand to access internet rapidly is not going away. If roadblocks that impede open access to it are put in place the only thing I am certain of is someone will find a way around it, and probably become a billionaire in the process.

Whoever circumvents it (runs their own pipes) will have to lobby the silly idiotic legislatures of the konservative (anti-freedom) states to be able to do it.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

I have no problem with private censorship.

TRANSLATION: you have no problem w/cable companies running cables through public taxpayer-funded land and then be subject to zero accountability from those said taxpayers.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

TRANSLATION: you have no problem w/cable companies running cables through public taxpayer-funded land and then be subject to zero accountability from those said taxpayers.

I do not support state decided "public" land, or state taxes.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

I do not support state decided "public" land, or state taxes.

Yes, we get that you are an anarchist.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Because the Constitution doesn't guarantee a right to free speech across the board, it only guarantees that the government cannot stop you. You have no right to use another person's platform for your speech.

Then why does Comcast get a right to free speech on its cables running on land (i. e. the platform) on which the public owns?
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

I do not support state decided "public" land, or state taxes.

That's fine, but since we paid for it, we still own it. Comcast does not own all the land through which its cables run.

Let me explain your reasoning: I have a right to dig up your backyard and front yard to run my own cables, and you have no say in the matter because I paid for the cables.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

That's fine, but since we paid for it, we still own it. Comcast does not own all the land through which its cables run.

You do not "own" anything to do with this.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Yes, we get that you are an anarchist.

That's not true; she's making a correct Libertarian stance (which is not anarchism), but her premise is invalid. If you utilize land owned by someone else, that someone else has a right to dictate the terms on which you can use that land.

And she's arguing that's not the case--that's not Libertarianism at all.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

You do not "own" anything to do with this.

What evidence do you have that Comcast owns all the land through which its cables run? Please provide it for us below. Certainly you're not arguing that Comcast can do whatever it wants on land it doesn't own, right?
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

That's not true; she's making a correct Libertarian stance (which is not anarchism), but her premise is invalid. If you utilize land owned by someone else, that someone else has a right to dictate the terms on which you can use that land.

And she's arguing that's not the case--that's not Libertarianism at all.

The views she's expressed support no state. That's anarchy in a nutshell. You can argue certain points are libertarian, but with no type of government that is anarchy.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

The views she's expressed support no state. That's anarchy in a nutshell. You can argue certain points are libertarian, but with no type of government that is anarchy.

It's a question of property rights. If I own a car and I drive on my own parking lot or my own road, I DO NOT have to have a license, or license plate, or insurance.

But if I utilize a shared road or bridge, I can be reasonably subject to regulation. Similarly, if Comcast runs cables through a shared resource, it can be subject to regulation from the owners of that resource.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Comcast does not "own" the land either.

So your'e saying that Comcast can do whatever it wants on land it doesn't own, and that's how a free market is supposed to work :rolleyes: ?
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

What?
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality


I was telling you that I plan to dig up your lawn in your front yard and back yard next week to run my own cables. FYI, I own the cables (I bought them), so you have no right to stop me.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

I was telling you that I plan to dig up your lawn in your front yard and back yard next week to run my own cables.

Nope.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality


You let Comcast run cables on land that you paid for, so I can do the same thing. Sorry, that's the rule--you have no right to dictate what I can do with my cables.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

You do not own that land, and neither does Comcast.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

You do not own that land, and neither does Comcast.

It doesn't matter--I own the cables, and so I can run it wherever I want (including on your property) and do with them as I please. That's a free market, right?

Comcast does that, and you're OK with it.
 
Back
Top Bottom