• 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!

McCain introduces bill to block Net neutrality

Cable and DSL aren't even equal a majority of the time. Cable is often faster and does not have as stringent location requirements as DSL does. The further you get from the source via DSL the slower your internet goes.

Cell and Satellite aren't viable internet options right now. At least, not compared to Cable/DSL/FiOS.
 
rivrrat said:
They don't compete at all. You're trying to tell me that they don't WANT to?
Click to expand...

They don't HAVE to. Do you think Comcast is in any competition with AT&T when their prices differ by a dollar or two tops? Please understand that there is no such as a market in the case of the internet. It's whichever company is prevalent in the area you live in and if you're lucky you can get hitched to some 3rd rate internet provider like Citizens.

The 'market' for ISPs is much like the market for computers. You have 5 or maybe tops 8 market holding PC makers and the rest are irrelevant. They all provide the same ****ty products and don't really compete to make the operating systems they use(ALL use Windows) reliable. Why? Because they simply do not have to.

That they actually want to allow other companies to have monopolies and force them out of servicing certain areas? That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

You can't read properly. That's why.
 
Hatuey said:
They don't HAVE to. Do you think Comcast is in any competition with AT&T when their prices differ by a dollar or two tops? Please understand that there is no such as a market in the case of the internet. It's whichever company is prevalent in the area you live in and if you're lucky you can get hitched to some 3rd rate internet provider like Citizens.

The 'market' for ISPs is much like the market for computers. You have 5 or maybe tops 8 market holding PC makers and the rest are irrelevant. They all provide the same ****ty products and don't really compete to make the operating systems they use(ALL use Windows) reliable. Why? Because they simply do not have to.



You can't read properly. That's why.
Click to expand...

Apparently you can't you read. Companies DO have monopolies in many areas. You do NOT have a choice of cable provider.
 
rivrrat said:
Apparently you can't you read. Companies DO have monopolies in many areas. You do NOT have a choice of cable provider.
Click to expand...

Wow you're silly here :

You :

rivrrat said:
that they just allow companies to compete with one another on an even playing field. Dunno why they don't do that.
Click to expand...

Me :

Because companies don't compete fair when they don't have to. There are tops 6 real internet providers in all of the continental U.S. - and when I say 'real' I mean with any significant market share. We do not have a market when it comes to the internet in the U.S. - we have a cartel of internet providers. Just like there is no oil market. There is a cartel of oil producing countries(OPEC).
Click to expand...

You :

rivrrat said:
They don't compete at all. You're trying to tell me that they don't WANT to? That they actually want to allow other companies to have monopolies and force them out of servicing certain areas? That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

No. I am explaining to you that they simply do not have to. Which is entirely different then not wanting to regardless of whether some companies hold monopolies over certain areas or not.

You put AT&T and Comcast with a myriad of other little noname providers and we can assess that the majority of the population will be more or less evenly split between the two major players with a small deviant amount going to other providers. Why? Because there is no competition. Why would they have to compete when they can give the perception that they are while setting the prices at nearly identical levels?

My argument doesn't fool itself into believing that if companies had to compete they actually would.
 
I am torn on net neutrality, but I believe it to be a necessary evil. Without it, here is what your ISP may eventually look like:

5RrWm.png
 
PeteEU said:
Kinda ironic that a man with next to non computer skills introduces a bill on it.. not to mention one that has received tons of money from the telecommunications industry who are against any melding in their monopolistic market. Yet again we have a Republican putting forward legislation to defend bad practices in an industry that are hurting the consumer.... ahh the irony.
Click to expand...

Barack Obama received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations from various banking and insurance companies during his campaign for President; more than any other politician in Washington actually. He won and bailed them out. I'm sure you were terribly disturbed by this and made your concerns known to the forum.
 
I also support Net Neutrality because I am opposed to telecom companies deciding who will be able access faster internet speeds and who will not.
 
rivrrat said:
Apparently you can't you read. Companies DO have monopolies in many areas. You do NOT have a choice of cable provider.
Click to expand...
This is similar to power companies that have regulated monopolies. Apparently it is not feasible to have every company in existence competing in the same area due to ownership of transmission media, maintenance, space, etc....
 
American said:
This is similar to power companies that have regulated monopolies. Apparently it is not feasible to have every company in existence competing in the same area due to ownership of transmission media, maintenance, space, etc....
Click to expand...

LOL what a load of bs. How come we in Europe can pick and choose what power supplier we want?.
 
winston53660 said:
Here in Texas we have choices.
Click to expand...

Of course, not everyone lives in the dark ages :)

Point is, if the administration and congress wanted to have competition in the telecommunications market, then they would in act similar laws as we have here in Europe and force the giants to play ball.

It is funny how US telecommunications companies sound exactly like the European monopoly giants... a decade+ ago when the EU forced competition into the market.
 
What's funny about it?
 
PeteEU said:
It is funny how US telecommunications companies sound exactly like the European monopoly giants... a decade+ ago when the EU forced competition into the market.
Click to expand...

I lived in Europe for two years, your telcoms nothing like ours, you can actually HEAR through our phones.
 
PeteEU said:
Point is, if the administration and congress wanted to have competition in the telecommunications market, then they would in act similar laws as we have here in Europe and force the giants to play ball.

It is funny how US telecommunications companies sound exactly like the European monopoly giants... a decade+ ago when the EU forced competition into the market.
Click to expand...

Such as.......... Orange:rofl (who btw has the ****tiest service i have ever experienced). Good luck to anyone attempting to sync a US computer to one of their ADSL fed live box's. It is a matter of luck!
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Such as.......... Orange:rofl (who btw has the ****tiest service i have ever experienced). Good luck to anyone attempting to sync a US computer to one of their ADSL fed live box's. It is a matter of luck!
Click to expand...

Hey if you dont like Orange then there are plenty of other ISPs :)... which is the point.

But yea, Orange has had some "issues" on quality :)
 
PeteEU said:
Hey if you dont like Orange then there are plenty of other ISPs :)... which is the point.

But yea, Orange has had some "issues" on quality :)
Click to expand...

Not in Parisian suburbs.
 
PeteEU said:
What did you say? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

:):):):cool:

Although the early 80s was last time I was there, phone service was horrible. So, if they've updated, I'm unaware, been stateside since.
 
Charles Martel said:
:):):):cool:

Although the early 80s was last time I was there, phone service was horrible. So, if they've updated, I'm unaware, been stateside since.
Click to expand...

Hehe early 80s = before the forced liberalization. So yes, things have changed quite a bit.
 
Hatuey said:
My argument doesn't fool itself into believing that if companies had to compete they actually would.
Click to expand...

Of course they would. If they had the option to compete with another company or allow another company to have a monopoly in many areas, I'm sure they'd go for competition. And if they CHOOSE not to, fine. But they should have the CHOICE. And until they have the CHOICE, and I actually have a CHOICE, then net neutrality is a necessary evil.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Not in Parisian suburbs.
Click to expand...

Hmm okay I admit that I am not up to date with the French ISP market, but those areas of Europe I have been there has always been alternatives in ISPs, even in the rural areas most often.

But saying that, the European telecommunications market might be liberalized on paper, but it is still a work in progress in most countries. This is more than often due to the old monopoly companies fighting it tooth and nail and government having to constantly step in and force these companies to play according the laws. That is provided that government is not behind the "fighting tooth and nail"...

I know that in Denmark the old monopoly company only very recently was forced to lower what it charges other companies to use the phone network. And in Spain there is a tit for tat battle between Telefonica (old monopoly company) and new companies when it comes to ADSL and phones. For example Telefonica have and still do disconnect the phone lines when you switch over to another provider, forcing said provider to send out a man to reconnect you to the very same box... kinda funny and annoying. In Spain the nr. 1 complaint to the Ombudsman in local councils and on national scale is telephone and ADSL services. But then again compared to northern Europe, Spain is in the dark ages telecommunications wise.

Point is, while the European ISP and telecommunications market is liberalised it is not all roses and cake so to say, but at least for the most part we have many alternatives in most areas, something I understand often is not the case in the US.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom