• 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

Excon said:
:doh
You know that cellphone innovation/advancement has nothing to do with the service it provides being regulated.
And you also know that you said "Heh, ok." to that.

As I replied; That is right. You were wrong and it is okay.
So do you want to keep going in circles with this?
Click to expand...
Heh OK is a phrase of dismissal not agreement ...

As in I am dismissing your arguments until you have either new ones or can counter my points
 
polgara said:
Greetings, Kobie. :2wave:

Same here in NE Ohio with Time Warner, Kobie. When you call them, the first question the answering machine asks is whether it's your internet or your TV giving you problems - then you get routed to the correct department, and the fun begins. It usually means that we have to take the cable box/modem to them and getting another one to replace it. My brother finally went to Dish and he's been aggravation free at his house for years!
Click to expand...

Sometimes. :lol:
 
Excon said:
:doh
Your lack of spending time has lead you to make an erroneous statement.
Nowhere is it evident that he does, or does not understand what you call slow lanes.
Click to expand...

does he support net neutrality?

do you?
 
tacomancer said:
The initial argument was that cell phones were so advanced due to a lack of stifling regulations, set forth as an example against net neutrality.

Cell phones are subject to a number of FCC regulations as well as any regulations that pertain when they interface to the legacy phone system to make a call, yet cell phones advance at an astounding rate.

Also in spite of stifling regulations on phone systems, a number of innovations and upgrades were made, such as digital packet switching on the back end.

All of this shows that Cruz was wrong as are you for agreeing with him.
Click to expand...

Yes, but how many of those innovations use technology created with public funding? How much are these companies really doing themselves with their own money? If the government is just going to fund research then they can effectively cover up the damage their regulations are causing.
 
Henrin said:
Yes, but how many of those innovations use technology created with public funding? How much are these companies really doing themselves with their own money?
Click to expand...
I suspect almost all of the innovation is done with public funding with the possible exception of the standards bodies which can have joint funding.

I do not see how this is relevant though.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
10805756_10152836742812726_1229765909163887911_n.jpg
Click to expand...

And I'm right there with you. I support net neutrality, but not necessarily Net Neutrality.

Well done!
 
tacomancer said:
I suspect almost all of the innovation is done with public funding with the possible exception of the standards bodies which can have joint funding.

I do not see how this is relevant though.
Click to expand...

It's perfectly relevant. If the government is the body providing the money to do any sort of research then the business does not have to worry about that aspect of their company nor does the government have to worry about the damage their regulations are causing to innovation.
 
Henrin said:
It's perfectly relevant. If the government is the body providing the money to do any sort of research then the business does not have to worry about that aspect of their company nor does the government have to worry about the damage their regulations are causing to innovation.
Click to expand...
I am still not seeing the connection.

The fundamental point was that FCC regulation prevented the technological growth of telephony, that point was debunked on multiple points, but an implicit assumption I made within my argument was that the funding for research and development largely came from industry and that despite regulation there was still opportunity for growth.

In other words the regulations did not freeze innovation as was claimed by Cruz.
 
tacomancer said:
I am still not seeing the connection.

The fundamental point was that FCC regulation prevented the technological growth of telephony, that point was debunked on multiple points, but an implicit assumption I made within my argument was that the funding for research and development largely came from industry and that despite regulation there was still opportunity for growth.

In other words the regulations did not freeze innovation as was claimed by Cruz.
Click to expand...

Cruz being an idiot not withstanding, innovation in welfare states largely comes from the government. The point I was making is that this is an excellent way to cover up your own tracks. This way the economy is now dependent on you for innovation, so if your taxes are a bit too high or if your regulations are a bit too costly will have no real effect on innovation. It's entirely possible that regulations do cost enough to make private innovation pretty much impossible, but since the government already covers the bill it's more or less impossible to tell.
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
Cruz being an idiot not withstanding, innovation in welfare states largely comes from the government. The point I was making is that this is an excellent way to cover up your own tracks. This way the economy is now dependent on you for innovation, so if your taxes are a bit too high or if your regulations are bit too costly will have no real effect on innovation. It's entirely possible that regulations do cost enough to make private innovation pretty much impossible, but since the government already covers the bill it's more or less impossible to tell.
Click to expand...
Personally, I think regulating it as a utility is overkill. I think simply only allowing packet prioritization for security and network management should be enough.

If we run into a situation where people can't get their Netflix due to there not being enough bandwidth on the back end, the customers will largely handle it. Even in cases of a local monopoly as those companies will want to protect their brands. They could cut a deal with Netflix to host their most popular selections in a local data center for example.

It leaves a bit of gray area for the courts, sure, but I would prefer to let the market figure out how to get broadband out to rural areas and other innovations.
 
Last edited:
eohrnberger said:
And I'm right there with you. I support net neutrality, but not necessarily Net Neutrality.

Well done!
Click to expand...

And only idiots think the one on the right is what's being proposed.
 
tacomancer said:
Heh OK is a phrase of dismissal not agreement ...

As in I am dismissing your arguments until you have either new ones or can counter my points
Click to expand...
Your absurd point was countered.
Cellphone innovation/advancement has nothing to do with the service it provides being regulated.

Your assertion that it did is nonsense, and just shows that you have no valid argument.
And your continued deflection from the reality of that shows your are incapable of logically responding to being shown that you were wrong.




Helix said:
does he support net neutrality?
Click to expand...
From what he has stated he doesn't support classifying it as a Utility and wants it to remain unclassified as it is now.
That is the only thing that is clear.


Helix said:
do you?
Click to expand...
My position matters not to what Cruz has stated and is therefore irrelevant.
 
Deuce said:
And only idiots think the one on the right is what's being proposed.
Click to expand...
:doh
Really?
That is all Obama proposed.
And Cruz is the only one between the two proposing the non Governmental involvement like that on the left requires.
So who are the ones you are speaking about who also propose non governmental involvement as the one on the left requires?
 
Excon said:
Your absurd point was countered.
Cellphone innovation/advancement has nothing to do with the service it provides being regulated.

Your assertion that it did is nonsense, and just shows that you have no valid argument.
And your continued deflection from the reality of that shows your are incapable of logically responding to being shown that you were wrong.
Click to expand...

Heh, OK.
 
tacomancer said:
Heh, OK.
Click to expand...
Yep see, You want to go in circles just like a juvenile would.
Your argument is a failure.

Cellphone innovation/advancement has nothing to do with the service it provides being regulated.
 
Excon said:
My position matters not to what Cruz has stated and is therefore irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Of course it's relevant. Do you or do you not support net neutrality?
 
Excon said:
Yep see, You want to go in circles just like a juvenile would.
Your argument is a failure.

Cellphone innovation/advancement has nothing to do with the service it provides being regulated.
Click to expand...

But internet innovation/advancement somehow does? After all, net neutrality stifles innovation, according to the esteemed Sen. Cruz.
 
Excon said:
Yep see, You want to go in circles just like a juvenile would.
Your argument is a failure.

Cellphone innovation/advancement has nothing to do with the service it provides being regulated.
Click to expand...
That's because you have yet to make a counter point.

Simply stating that cellphone innovation isn't relevant without valid reasoning isn't enough.

Until you do so, yes we will go in circles because as the discussion stands, its up to you to show why i am wrong and until you do so, my argument is currently winning.
 
Helix said:
Of course it's relevant. Do you or do you not support net neutrality?
Click to expand...
Again. My position is not relevant to what Cruz said which is what this topic is about.
 
Kobie said:
But internet innovation/advancement somehow does? After all, net neutrality stifles innovation, according to the esteemed Sen. Cruz.
Click to expand...
There you go being wrong again.
That is a misstatement of the actual argument and is not according to Cruz.
Classifying it as a Utility would bring regulation which is what stifles advancement/innovation.
 
Kobie said:
But internet innovation/advancement somehow does? After all, net neutrality stifles innovation, according to the esteemed Sen. Cruz.
Click to expand...
It seems Mr Cruz really should avoid continued embarrassment and stop commenting about technology he doesn't understand.
 
tacomancer said:
That's because you have yet to make a counter point.

Simply stating that cellphone innovation isn't relevant without valid reasoning isn't enough.

Until you do so, yes we will go in circles because as the discussion stands, its up to you to show why i am wrong and until you do so, my argument is currently winning.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
Pointing out that your absurd assertion was wrong, is a valid counter. It is also a counter that you can not overcome.
So stop with the dishonesty.

Cellphone innovation/advancement has nothing to do with the service it provides being regulated.
 
Excon said:
Wrong.
Pointing out that your absurd assertion was wrong, is a valid counter. It is also a counter that you can not overcome.
So stop with the dishonesty.

Cellphone innovation/advancement has nothing to do with the service it provides being regulated.
Click to expand...
Simple fact is, its not absurd but fact, the fiendish regulation Mr Cruz so fears did not halt innovation as he claimed.
 
tacomancer said:
It seems Mr Cruz really should avoid continued embarrassment and stop commenting about technology he doesn't understand.
Click to expand...
That comment clearly applies to the both of you and not Cruz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom