• 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!

Obama pushes broadband plan

Thrilla said:
well, that all depends on the particular situation... got an example you'd like to discuss?
Click to expand...

The article linked in the OP. That would be a good place to start. Beefheart and I also linked to more specific examples.

which article?.. i've read many
Click to expand...

The article in the first post of the thread.

speaking of not reading, did you get around to reading the USPS piece on their monopoly ye?
Click to expand...

I suggest you first learn what the discussion is about then maybe I'll talk about the USPS.
 
Thrilla said:
don't be that way.. you and me both know you wouldn't accept an overtly right winged echo chamber link on anything.... nor should you.
Click to expand...

There are several stories about ALEC drafting laws for state legislatures to keep municipalities from having their own broadband services.

Google is your friend.

It happened, get over it.
 
Cardinal said:
The article linked in the OP. That would be a good place to start. Beefheart and I also linked to more specific examples.
Click to expand...
there's nothing in your articles about industry taking over government.... maybe you are talking about industry successfully lobbying government for policy that bars government from entering the private market place?



The article in the first post of the thread.
Click to expand...
yup.. read it.



I suggest you first learn what the discussion is about then maybe I'll talk about the USPS.
Click to expand...
I know what it's about, thanks.
I also know you have outright refused to read a shared link and lo and behold, here you are being hypocritical.
 
Thrilla said:
unfair competition exists in the private sector as well.. that's for damned sure... often the unfair practices is codified into law, making it a public/private partnership of corruption.

is that an excuse for the govt to take over what has been a private industry?.. or it is an excuse to properly regulate the market/industry?

personally, I lean towards proper regulation...for many reasons.... others seem to believe that the govt taking over the market is a very good thing.
Click to expand...

I think your assumptions are premature. My city's network is open access. If you want to start a business utilizing it, you will pay the exact same rate as anybody else and multiple companies can utilize the same lines, unlike with cable. You could start Thrilla Telephone & Telegraph and compete with Verizon, At&T, Google or anybody else in that sort of environment.
 
beefheart said:
Are you going to address the story, or where it is hosted?
Click to expand...
I addressed what I see the admin is up too. That you want to believe thier bull**** is on you. How many times can this man con you ppl?
 
I think part of the dispute is what assumptions people are making. I think if people assume the municipal broadbands will be like municipal water and you are forced to have it with no competition at whatever price they set, then you would see it as the government taking over the market. Like I have indicated, this is something my city is doing and it is the exact opposite. The city is creating the network, but anybody can access the fiber network to deliver their services, and in that sense, it is doing the exact opposite of what the former people seem to believe. We are not a huge market and I suspect that until the city finishes all the fiber we will not see a lot of competition off it, but eventually any company in the world could compete with any other company in the world to provide telephone, TV, internet over it up to the gig per second or whatever it is data capabilities.
 
MrVicchio said:
I addressed what I see the admin is up too. That you want to believe thier bull**** is on you. How many times can this man con you ppl?
Click to expand...

ALEC wrote the laws, the states passed them.

Not too much conjecture on that.
 
Erod said:
A step toward eventually running the internet in full - a la "single payer" - and instantaneously monitoring every keystroke, transaction, and communication that every American individual and business makes.
Click to expand...

Please take us down that slippery slope and explain that transition to us in detail, using your own words.
 
MrVicchio said:
I read this: Obama pushes broadband plan, critics see

Translation Obama wants tax payers to pay for internet the government can give away to "targeted demographics" in return for votes. that's all this is. thats his schtick. Bribing stupid ppl with free **** and packaging it in a way the guillible can swallow, hook line amd sinker.
Click to expand...

Well, that's a remarkably stupid interpretation of the article in question.
 
MrVicchio said:
I addressed what I see the admin is up too. That you want to believe thier bull**** is on you. How many times can this man con you ppl?
Click to expand...

TRANSLATION: "If Obama thinks it is good, it is automatically bad." What a pathetic string of "arguments" you've managed to string together here. You really haven't missed a beat.
 
jonny5 said:
Here it comes, the first roadblock in the internet, setup by the federal govt. And a violation of states rights. The govt has no power to control personal communications, certainly not to tell cities that they cant make laws prohibiting govts from running their own ISPs. And Obama wants to make YOU pay more taxes for it.

The result, much like with sewage, garbage, electricity, will be to drive private options out of business since govt can compete unfairly.



Obama pushes broadband plan, critics see
Click to expand...

Yes because the government did such a great job in creating a website, let's trust them to build the internet. This sounds like a good plan :)

Declan said:
I think part of the dispute is what assumptions people are making. I think if people assume the municipal broadbands will be like municipal water and you are forced to have it with no competition at whatever price they set, then you would see it as the government taking over the market. Like I have indicated, this is something my city is doing and it is the exact opposite. The city is creating the network, but anybody can access the fiber network to deliver their services, and in that sense, it is doing the exact opposite of what the former people seem to believe. We are not a huge market and I suspect that until the city finishes all the fiber we will not see a lot of competition off it, but eventually any company in the world could compete with any other company in the world to provide telephone, TV, internet over it up to the gig per second or whatever it is data capabilities.
Click to expand...

If the government was really interested in solving the issue, why not break up the monopolies that have prevented competition. I mean, when you have the CEO of (I think it was) Time Warner come out and openly saying that they have negotiated which markets they are going to compete in and which ones they will not, something needs to happened. Bottom line though, I just don't trust the government anywhere near the internet, especially.. as I said above, after the Obamacare Website disaster...

Besides, I don't think this government has proven they can handle infrastructure they already have to take care of... we really want to hand them more?
 
Last edited:
Kobie said:
TRANSLATION: "If Obama thinks it is good, it is automatically bad." What a pathetic string of "arguments" you've managed to string together here. You really haven't missed a beat.
Click to expand...

Dude, Obamas lied for 6 years straight and you still drool at the sound of his voice.
 
Kobie said:
Please take us down that slippery slope and explain that transition to us in detail, using your own words.
Click to expand...

Is it so hard to imagine? If the government were actually competent enough to build, run and maintain an internet infrastructure that could rival the one already in place, then they could subsidize the prices below what others could compete at. Thus driving them out and leaving the government as the only provider in town.

Again, not so worried about this because the government has shown with our bridges and roads that they can't run and maintain infrastructure.

MrVicchio said:
Dude, Obamas lied for 6 years straight and you still drool at the sound of his voice.
Click to expand...

You clearly don't know Kobie if you think he's a drooling fan of Obama. Don't you realize that even liberals have started to abandon him?
 
MrVicchio said:
Dude, Obamas lied for 6 years straight and you still drool at the sound of his voice.
Click to expand...

Hey, thanks for telling me what I think, I do appreciate it.

You can pretty much set your watch by the fact that when some conservative starts in with this line of attack, it's because they can't find anything in the proposed legislation they can legitimately debate.
 
Dude, the GOPs in DC have lied about Obama lying for six straight years.
The GOP of obstruction now insists on DEMs working with them and not obstructing as McConnell did for six years.

Same playbook as last decade when McConnell whined for straight-up-and-down votes.
Only to forget that little detail this decade setting all-time records for filibusters each of the last SIX years.

I hope that discussion of the last SIX years has refreshed your memory of what actually happened the last SIX years .

MrVicchio said:
Dude, Obamas lied for 6 years straight and you still drool at the sound of his voice.
Click to expand...
 
The GOP House of Hell No has shown how insufficient funding and the inability to pass their
own damn Transportation bill has led to the shape our roads and bridges are in.

Btw, when's the last time you traveled on said roads and bridges to be such an expert on them?

And when does the Transportation trust fund go belly up and default ?

Hamster Buddha said:
Is it so hard to imagine? If the government were actually competent enough to build, run and maintain an internet infrastructure that could rival the one already in place, then they could subsidize the prices below what others could compete at. Thus driving them out and leaving the government as the only provider in town.

Again, not so worried about this because the government has shown with our bridges and roads that they can't run and maintain infrastructure.



You clearly don't know Kobie if you think he's a drooling fan of Obama. Don't you realize that even liberals have started to abandon him?
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
The GOP House of Hell No has shown how insufficient funding and the inability to pass their
own damn Transportation bill has led to the shape our roads and bridges are in.

Btw, when's the last time you traveled on said roads and bridges to be such an expert on them?

And when does the Transportation trust fund go belly up and default ?
Click to expand...

Wait are you trying to argue that the infrastructure isn't in desperate need of repair?
 
Hamster Buddha said:
Wait are you trying to argue that the infrastructure isn't in desperate need of repair?
Click to expand...

Is that what I said--NO--projection much?

What are YOUR experiences on our roads and bridges throughout the Nation--are you afraid to answer the question?

What is your knowledge on the Transportation Trust fund?
And the Transportation Bill that the Hell NO caucus couldn't pass last year--oops--House leadership wouldn't put up their own bill for a vote.

Nothing's changed so far this year, except both chambers are run by the dysfunctionals.
The GOPea-brains can't even agree with each other, let alone DEMs .
 
faithful_servant said:
Because the gov't should only be a referee in the market, not a player. Giving the gov't a business means giving it the ability to pass laws/regulations that give it an unfair advantage.
Click to expand...

Since broad band is a monopoly in most markets what you are really saying is that Govt. should not prevent or stop monopolies. Again that is a primary job of Govt. No wonder you hate the Govt. you have no idea what its jobs are, and highways are certainly one of them superhighways included.
 
Last edited:
NIMBY said:
Is that what I said--NO--projection much?

What are YOUR experiences on our roads and bridges throughout the Nation--are you afraid to answer the question?

What is your knowledge on the Transportation Trust fund?
And the Transportation Bill that the Hell NO caucus couldn't pass last year--oops--House leadership wouldn't put up their own bill for a vote.

Nothing's changed so far this year, except both chambers are run by the dysfunctionals.
The GOPea-brains can't even agree with each other, let alone DEMs .
Click to expand...

I wasn't asking a loaded question Nimby, I was just wanting clarification. Second, my experiences are the same as yours I would assume. And third, the Transportation Trust fun is underfunded right now by TRILLIONS of dollars. That's what is estimated to fully repair our infrastructure. The reason this occurred was the same reason why there are so many unfunded liabilities throughout the government, and that is we keep trying to take from one sector of the government to pay for another. Look at lottery dollars that were earmaked for education as another example.

I'll be honest, I don't know anything about Transportation Bill, so I'm not going to comment on it. All I will say is that anything that was proposed last year was doomed to failure as it was an election year. There's probably more to it that you are leaving out, but as I said, I don't pay that close attention to Congress to care. I do know that the answer isn't simply to throw more money at the problem, as that has been tried and failed.
 
Kobie said:
Hey, thanks for telling me what I think, I do appreciate it.

You can pretty much set your watch by the fact that when some conservative starts in with this line of attack, it's because they can't find anything in the proposed legislation they can legitimately debate.
Click to expand...

I know. It's hard to believe you are not talking to ten year olds when they post drivel like that. I think their brains are regressing from the strain.
 
Carjosse said:
Why should a city not be able to setup it's own broadband? It is not forcing cities to create their own. It will add much needed competition to the telecomms industry.
Click to expand...

No, it will not, Cites, States and the Federal government will never go out of business for making bad choice because they can just tax and print money to hide/cover wasteful spreading, brides and cronyism.
 
iguanaman said:
I know. It's hard to believe you are not talking to ten year olds when they post drivel like that. I think their brains are regressing from the strain.
Click to expand...

You think criminals will obey the law, you have less then no room to pull rank on anyone.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom