• 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!

Ted Cruz Hits Back At Al Franken On Net Neutrality

Seriously? Comcast et al "allowed" Netflix to pay for peered connections as a courtesy? I suppose the mob allowed businesses to buy protection as a "courtesy" as well.

Netflix isn't slowing anyone down. Both Netflix and Porndig have both bought and paid for the amount of bandwidth they're consuming. Neither of which has anything to do with an ISP's network.

An ISP's network slows down when the people who purchase bandwidth from an ISP exceed that ISPs capacity. What they're using it for doesn't matter.

This would be like your electric company coming to the conclusion that lots of electricity is going towards air conditioners during the summer. Therefore the electric company sets a much higher rate, but only for air conditioners. Of course, air conditioner conditioner manufacturers can make this go away if they pay the electric company a yearly fee... as a courtesy of course. Oh, and the electric company is also now making it's own air conditioner. It barely works, but all of it's electricity is free.

----------

Edit: as a side note, has anyone else noticed that the anti-Net Neutrality folks have suddenly switched en-masse to calling it NN? As far as I can tell they're the only ones doing it, and it's just weird.



"Netflix has historically routed its streaming content to broadband providers through a number of Internet middlemen. But since mid-2012, the company has been trying to reduce what it pays these middlemen by getting broadband companies to hook up directly to its new video-distribution network without paying them fees for carrying its traffic."


Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam - WSJ
 
Mark Cuban isn't really a liberal's favorite, he's a big Ayn Rand fan.

Cuban isn't liberal or conservative, he's smart: he's a moderate independent.
 
The lemmings here are not even admitting that that is what will happen if it gets classified as a utility.
They are just supporting what ever Obama wants like good little lemmings.

I most likely need to study this matter to be more informed as to which way is the best way for the American people. With utilities, you get charged for your usage. Would that be an improvement, or not? I currently have Verizon for FIOS TV and internet. There are various plans for their internet access that cost differing amounts according to DL speeds and upload speeds. I think I chose the median plan. It's expensive!

But NN doesn't have anything to do with my plan. It has to do with prioritizing connections. That's my understanding of "throttling". Priority 1 connections would tromp all over regular customers in the same area. I don't think that they should be allowed to do that.

So, is Obama right? do we need to change the nets to utilities to keep that from happening? Or is Cruz right? Leave it as is?

I think the real question here is geared more toward Web stores like Amazon and such, not so much for us peons.

Which way is best people? I cannot stand to be on the wrong side of an issue due to ignorance on my part.
 
"Netflix has historically routed its streaming content to broadband providers through a number of Internet middlemen. But since mid-2012, the company has been trying to reduce what it pays these middlemen by getting broadband companies to hook up directly to its new video-distribution network without paying them fees for carrying its traffic."


Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam - WSJ

Those "middlemen" have a name. They're what we call, "the internet".

Here's a good video by James May that will teach you the basics of how it works.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3sr7_0FyPA
 
So, is Obama right? do we need to change the nets to utilities to keep that from happening? Or is Cruz right? Leave it as is?
No it doesn't need to be a utility to accomplish NN. So Cruz is right in that regard.
Franken says we have had NN all along and we need to reclassify it so it remains the same. :doh Someone needs to tell that idiot that opening it up to regulation and taxes is not remaining the same.

So Franken says we have had NN all along and Cruz says it needs to remain the same. Whether that indicates he is for NN or not is really irrelevant to the issue of Obama's suggestion and his opposition to it.


I currently have ... It's expensive!
Well classifying it as a utility is a guaranteed 16% Fed tax, and being a utility may also bring state and local charges as well.
So if Obama gets his way, be prepared for an increase.
 
If I have 10 peers, would letting netflix take up 7 of them organically be "neutral" to the people trying stream from porndig Youtube? (I use 10 as an example).

PG-ed your quote. If users are requesting more Netflix data than others, isn't that organic? It's not like Netflix is forcing the users to watch anything and thus eat up the bandwidth.

point being, that if one service is eating up all the capacity of an isp, is that neutrality if other sites and services are squeezed out?

That then depends on the order of data being requested. If the ISP is treating all data as it comes in equally, then it's being neutral in the sense that it's a first come first serve principle.
 
I most likely need to study this matter to be more informed as to which way is the best way for the American people. With utilities, you get charged for your usage. Would that be an improvement, or not? I currently have Verizon for FIOS TV and internet. There are various plans for their internet access that cost differing amounts according to DL speeds and upload speeds. I think I chose the median plan. It's expensive!

But NN doesn't have anything to do with my plan. It has to do with prioritizing connections. That's my understanding of "throttling". Priority 1 connections would tromp all over regular customers in the same area. I don't think that they should be allowed to do that.

So, is Obama right? do we need to change the nets to utilities to keep that from happening? Or is Cruz right? Leave it as is?

I think the real question here is geared more toward Web stores like Amazon and such, not so much for us peons.

Which way is best people? I cannot stand to be on the wrong side of an issue due to ignorance on my part.

For me it comes down to this, I HATE paying for my electric bill. I am no fan of the utility that I am paired up with in the town I live in. However I love paying my internet bill because it's exactly what I want with the company I chose. I understand that a lot don't have this choice now, but in the future if they become Government utilities that will almost likely mean less choice for the consumer. As mergers form before reclassification and more cities/states buy rights and the utilities get easy access to their contracts. How do you think this will affect ISP choice in the future if that happens???

What we should be doing is demanding unbundled services from the corporations, utilities, and government level. Each major ISP should be able to get rolled out into each and every location in America. THAT is the free market at work. I think that's really fair. Don't you?
 
PG-ed your quote. If users are requesting more Netflix data than others, isn't that organic? It's not like Netflix is forcing the users to watch anything and thus eat up the bandwidth.

True it's organic, but so is a DDOS attack. ;)

Point being if the bandwith for the isp is finite due to peers coming in, what are there options, to let netflix eat it all up? (which will happen in the future as streaming takes over cable). I don't know. but I do know is that If I am sold a 100mb line, I should not be effectively throttled because everyone else is watching breaking bad re-runs.....




That then depends on the order of data being requested. If the ISP is treating all data as it comes in equally, then it's being neutral in the sense that it's a first come first serve principle.


which would in the future as streaming takes over, kill everyone's connection due to congestion. the answer to this is what netflix wanted to do, direct pipe into the isp's instead of over peers.
 
If Net Neutrality opponents thought they had a winning argument, they wouldn't be attempting to sell you the line of BS that they want to keep the Internet the way it currently is. This is an outright lie.
 
If Net Neutrality opponents thought they had a winning argument, they wouldn't be attempting to sell you the line of BS that they want to keep the Internet the way it currently is. This is an outright lie.
You are speaking nonsense. Again!

Being against Obama's suggestion to classify it as a utility in no way makes one against NN.
 
You are speaking nonsense. Again!

Being against Obama's suggestion to classify it as a utility in no way makes one against NN.

I was speaking about opponents of Net Neutrality, specifically. I made my post short and sweet, and easy for anyone (but you) to understand.
 
I was speaking about opponents of Net Neutrality, specifically. I made my post short and sweet, and easy for anyone (but you) to understand.

I know exactly what you said. You were speaking nonsense again.

Your words of; "keep the Internet the way it currently is." Is what Cruz has said, and as pointed out: Being against Obama's suggestion to classify it as a utility in no way makes one against NN.
 
I know exactly what you said. You were speaking nonsense again.

Your words of; "keep the Internet the way it currently is." Is what Cruz has said, and as pointed out: Being against Obama's suggestion to classify it as a utility in no way makes one against NN.

Cruz is an opponent of Net Neutrality in general, so why are you propping him up as a champion of Net Neutrality?
 


Gets good at around 6:30.
 
Cruz is an opponent of Net Neutrality in general, so why are you propping him up as a champion of Net Neutrality?

There you go talking nonsense again.
He is a opponent of Obama's absurd idea to classify it as a utility.
Which is exactly what he spoke to in the provided video.
 
There you go talking nonsense again.
He is a opponent of Obama's absurd idea to classify it as a utility.
Which is exactly what he spoke to in the provided video.

Ted Cruz: "Net Neutrality is Obamacare for the Internet."
 
Ted Cruz: "Net Neutrality is Obamacare for the Internet."
:doh
And in context, that was said in direct opposition to Obama's suggestion. And he is correct.
So you thinking you have a point is hilarious.
 
:doh
And in context, that was said in direct opposition to Obama's suggestion. And he is correct.
So you thinking you have a point is hilarious.

My hilarious point is that Ted Cruz opposes Net Neutrality. Which he plainly stated was as evil as Obamacare. I don't need you to put his words in context. Cruz is perfectly able to speak for himself.
 
My hilarious point is that Ted Cruz opposes Net Neutrality. Which he plainly stated was as evil as Obamacare. I don't need you to put his words in context. Cruz is perfectly able to speak for himself.
:doh
Figure you don't pay attention or to context.
You do not know that.

All you know is that he opposes what Obama has proposed, which is a good idea.
 
:doh
Figure you don't pay attention or to context.
You do not know that.

All you know is that he opposes what Obama has proposed, which is a good idea.

Give it up, you lost. Ted Cruz opposes Net Neutrality, and is lying about wanting to keep the Internet the same. The Supreme Court itself presented the public utility option as a way of protecting the Internet from throttling.
 
Give it up, you lost. Ted Cruz opposes Net Neutrality, and is lying about wanting to keep the Internet the same. The Supreme Court itself presented the public utility option as a way of protecting the Internet from throttling.
If this is about winning and losing, you are the one who lost as you are speaking about that which you do not know.
And as previously pointed out as well, what the Sct has to say on this matter is irrelevant.

Regulating it as a Utility is not needed.


You haven't made a valid argument as to why classifying it as a Utility is a good idea.
All you have done is whine that Cruz opposes Obama's idea. Yeah, you clearly lost.
 
Last edited:
You haven't made a valid argument as to why classifying it as a Utility is a good idea.

I haven't made an argument, I've stated a fact. Classifying the Internet as a utility protects it from throttling by ISPs.

I haven't whined about Cruz, either. I've quoted his exact position on Net Neutrality.

Got anything else?
 
I haven't made an argument, I've stated a fact.
No you haven't. You have stated a flawed opinion as argument.


Classifying the Internet as a utility protects it from throttling by ISPs.
1. That isn't a fact. That will not happen unless steps are taken after it is classified as such. As classification does not automatically cause ISP's not to throttle.
2. It isn't just about throttling. It is about packet prioritization. And both of those will continue to happen regardless of any NN.
3. That isn't an argument or a fact as to why obtaining NN this way is appropriate, let alone wise or best.


I haven't whined about Cruz, either. I've quoted his exact position on Net Neutrality.
Wrong. You have whined about what you think his position is. You have taken what he has said out of context and have assumed without knowing.
So again, since you do not pay attention. Being against obtaining NN by classifying it as Obama wants to, does not mean one is against NN.
What about that do you not understand?


Classifying it as a Utility opens it up to more regulation than it needs, causes it to be taxed when we do not need it to be taxed, and regulation usually stifles innovation.

So no. What Obama wants to do is wrong and not at all the appropriate thing to do.
You want NN, obtain it another way.
 
Back
Top Bottom