• 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!

Do you support repeal of net neutrality?

Do you support repeal of net neutrality?

  • Total voters
    91
  • Poll closed .
CLAX1911 said:
For **** sake... I've said this now three times.

The biggest companies on the planet are FOR net nutrality.

Their only interest is to lower costs and increase revenue.

Good lord how many times do I have to say that?
Click to expand...

So Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon are the little guys being bullied?
 
CLAX1911 said:
No they are being made into monopolies.
Click to expand...

So then why should we take their word they will not exploit consumers like they have been trying to do when net neutrality is repealed?
 
Carjosse said:
See this is why people think Libertarians are stupid. That is very clearly not an option.
Click to expand...

People call others with differing political beliefs names normally out of frustration. They think others are dumber than them because they lack self awareness.

It wouldn't be any option under net nutrality either.
 
Carjosse said:
See this is why people think Libertarians are stupid. That is very clearly not an option.
Click to expand...

Here’s the argument by Apple, Netflix and other Like companies:

As part of the FCC's review of internet regulations, Pai has asked whether the FCC needs rules that prohibit blocking or throttling traffic, or providing Internet fast lanes.

Apple, Amazon, Netflix and others that have built huge businesses under the lighter regulatory regime have come out against Pai's proposals, arguing that the government's policies should ensure an open Internet with prohibitions against broadband providers throttling, blocking or prioritizing some traffic.

Apple’s Blueprint for fair and open access to Internet given to FCC

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10830069155074/NN reply comments (final).pdf
Click to expand...

Question:

How is throttling, blocking and prioritizing traffic good for Internet consumers? Plus our individual surfing habits can be collected and sold by our ISPs.
 
CLAX1911 said:
People call others with differing political beliefs names normally out of frustration. They think others are dumber than them because they lack self awareness.

It wouldn't be any option under net nutrality either.
Click to expand...

Under net neutrality consumers are protected from he exploitative behavior I previously stated through Title II and also ensures that competitors can survive.
 
Carjosse said:
Under net neutrality consumers are protected from he exploitative behavior I previously stated through Title II and also ensures that competitors can survive.
Click to expand...

You were wrong the first time.

It will ruin the ability for there to be competitors.
 
CLAX1911 said:
You were wrong the first time.

It will ruin the ability for there to be competitors.
Click to expand...

That is what we have done in America generally, that's what the corruption was for.....the haves get more, the have not get less.....corporations keep eating themselves, getting colossal, and they make sure to keep any potential upstarts dead......and the government helps.....and they damn well better.......they are paid for goods!
 
CLAX1911 said:
You were wrong the first time.

It will ruin the ability for there to be competitors.
Click to expand...

So show me where in the last two years the FCC has used the net neutrality rules to destroy rather than foster competition? How exactly does net neutrality prevent competition.
 
Carjosse said:
So show me where in the last two years the FCC has used the net neutrality rules to destroy rather than foster competition? How exactly does net neutrality prevent competition.
Click to expand...

Over the last 2 years and Houston AT&T has becoming a monopoly. Where are the competitors? They used to be here.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Over the last 2 years and Houston AT&T has becoming a monopoly. Where are the competitors? They used to be here.
Click to expand...

They were a monopoly well before that, Houston has a smaller fibre provider, but they need time to build infrastructure and Title II protection will help protect them from AT&T. Other cities are building municipal broadband now that they can for example. Title II also allows the FCC to actually have regulatory force.
 
Carjosse said:
They were a monopoly well before that,
Click to expand...
No they weren't I personally hands had 3 different providers.

Houston has a smaller fibre provider, but they need time to build infrastructure and Title II protection will help protect them from AT&T.
Click to expand...
Outside of forbidding them to sell to AT&T I don't see how they can do that. And such a law would be the government seizing them. Because If I can't sell my property to whomever I wish, I dding own it.

Title 2 can't make a market for them it can't encourage innovation, so all they will ever be under net nutrality is a lesser version of AT&T or nothing at all.

Other cities are building municipal broadband now that they can for example. Title II also allows the FCC to actually have regulatory force.
Click to expand...
That isn't a good thing. More government control necessarily means less liberty.
 
CLAX1911 said:
No they weren't I personally hands had 3 different providers.

Outside of forbidding them to sell to AT&T I don't see how they can do that. And such a law would be the government seizing them. Because If I can't sell my property to whomever I wish, I dding own it.

Title 2 can't make a market for them it can't encourage innovation, so all they will ever be under net nutrality is a lesser version of AT&T or nothing at all.


That isn't a good thing. More government control necessarily means less liberty.
Click to expand...

I am going to guess that they were bought by one of the big ones before current net neutrality rules. What AT&T would do is threaten to cut them off any further expansion or severely undercutting them, Title II allows regulation of that as well as preventing AT&T from throttling, blocking, or zero-rating content.

If you do not want monopolies exploiting consumers you have to allow the FCC to actually regulate them with net neutrality rules. How hard is that to understand? This is why Libertarianism is ****ing ridiculous it does not understand that corporations do not act in the best interest of consumers and sometimes you have to give up some liberty to protect consumer rights and protect innovation.
 
What a mess. What is the ****ing truth about Net Neutrality?

The following is MY understanding of the issue regarding NN.

After the repeal, there won't be any rules preventing ISPs from blocking or throttling Internet traffic. ISPs will also be allowed to charge websites and online services for faster and more reliable network access.

In short, ISPs will be free to do whatever they want.

Comcast deleted a “no paid prioritization” pledge from its net neutrality webpage on the very same day that Pai announced his plan to repeal net neutrality rules.

Head of FTC claims that after the repeal, FTC jurisdiction hinges on those ISPs’ promises not to throttle and block. But the repeal leaves open the possibility that ISPs could “change promises” related to blocking or throttling. BEND OVER CONSUMERS.

Large corporations like Comcast, ATT, and Verizon are licking their chops because their vision for the future of the Internet will turn it into a packaged product like TV programming. “Like cable and satellite TV companies” charge crazy money for every package that they sell, we can expect the same from corporations like Comcast, ATT, and Verizon BECAUSE THEY CAN legally be self-will-run-riot like the US Government.

The above said - is it possible to find a unanimous truth about anything in the US?

If all forms of information that is disseminated from every source that has the power to disseminate information is “claimed” or “alleged” to be false by any or all who disagree with any given information - with no acceptable evidence (for or against allegations) by all parties concerned”. Which, by the way, is now the current state of mind by the people regarding politics and media. NOW our nation is so divided that nobody can believe anything coming from any source. The American consumers and voters are truly ****ed, hopeless ****ed.
 
Carjosse said:
I am going to guess that they were bought by one of the big ones before current net neutrality rules.
Click to expand...
So current net nutrality rules demand start ups to either directly compete with a giant like AT&T or wither on the vine? How does that not make AT&T a Monopoly?

What AT&T would do is threaten to cut them off any further expansion or severely undercutting them, Title II allows regulation of that as well as preventing AT&T from throttling, blocking, or zero-rating content.
Click to expand...
so it is establishing a monopoly.

If you do not want monopolies exploiting consumers you have to allow the FCC to actually regulate them with net neutrality rules. How hard is that to understand?
Click to expand...
net neutrality laws seem to seek to make a monopoly.

This is why Libertarianism is ****ing ridiculous it does not understand that corporations do not act in the best interest of consumers and sometimes you have to give up some liberty to protect consumer rights and protect innovation.
Click to expand...
okay I get you don't like Libertarians you can quit wetting your pants about it.

And for the fourth f****** time I have said this and you seem to ignore it every time I don't know why. The biggest corporations on the planet that mankind has ever seen are demanding net neutrality.

So if I'm to distrust corporations or the government both of those 10 points require me to distrust net neutrality
 
Removable Mind said:
What a mess. What is the ****ing truth about Net Neutrality?

The following is MY understanding of the issue regarding NN.

After the repeal, there won't be any rules preventing ISPs from blocking or throttling Internet traffic. ISPs will also be allowed to charge websites and online services for faster and more reliable network access.

In short, ISPs will be free to do whatever they want.
Click to expand...
they actually won't though. There are still rules about that that companies must follow.

What net neutrality is seeking is to make the services public like phone service or the Electric Company. Not the provider the people who maintain the power grid. Here in Houston that CenterPoint and they don't have to be good because there's no one in competition with them.

Comcast deleted a “no paid prioritization” pledge from its net neutrality webpage on the very same day that Pai announced his plan to repeal net neutrality rules.

Head of FTC claims that after the repeal, FTC jurisdiction hinges on those ISPs’ promises not to throttle and block. But the repeal leaves open the possibility that ISPs could “change promises” related to blocking or throttling. BEND OVER CONSUMERS.
Click to expand...
without net neutrality laws you can simply go to another ISP. With net neutrality laws the isps that would start up have to compete with a big guy they would have to do that anyway but if for whatever reason they can't they can always sell to the big guy thus it's not that big of a risk to take it on. Because chances are there will be offers to buy your company. If you are not allowed to sell your company to the big guy that would probably want to buy it you have to sit there and go bankrupt or hope and pray that you grab enough for the market. And since all you can do is use what's already there you probably aren't going to.

Large corporations like Comcast, ATT, and Verizon are licking their chops because their vision for the future of the Internet will turn it into a packaged product like TV programming. “Like cable and satellite TV companies” charge crazy money for every package that they sell, we can expect the same from corporations like Comcast, ATT, and Verizon BECAUSE THEY CAN legally be self-will-run-riot like the US Government.
Click to expand...
big companies are always going to be big companies and they're always going to look out for themselves and they are always going to find ways to make money. If you don't let them buy out their competition no one dares become competition.

The above said - is it possible to find a unanimous truth about anything in the US?

If all forms of information that is disseminated from every source that has the power to disseminate information is “claimed” or “alleged” to be false by any or all who disagree with any given information - with no acceptable evidence (for or against allegations) by all parties concerned”. Which, by the way, is now the current state of mind by the people regarding politics and media. NOW our nation is so divided that nobody can believe anything coming from any source. The American consumers and voters are truly ****ed, hopeless ****ed.
Click to expand...
the division on this issue seems to be like the division on most issues it false along party lines but not because people are being loyal to Democrats or Republicans I don't think that really plays into this.

You expressed that large corporations are licking their chops they're going to do that anyway they're going to make money they run the show. And it seems to be people who lean a little more left take issue with that.
 
CLAX1911 said:
they actually won't though. There are still rules about that that companies must follow.

What net neutrality is seeking is to make the services public like phone service or the Electric Company. Not the provider the people who maintain the power grid. Here in Houston that CenterPoint and they don't have to be good because there's no one in competition with them.

without net neutrality laws you can simply go to another ISP. With net neutrality laws the isps that would start up have to compete with a big guy they would have to do that anyway but if for whatever reason they can't they can always sell to the big guy thus it's not that big of a risk to take it on. Because chances are there will be offers to buy your company. If you are not allowed to sell your company to the big guy that would probably want to buy it you have to sit there and go bankrupt or hope and pray that you grab enough for the market. And since all you can do is use what's already there you probably aren't going to.

big companies are always going to be big companies and they're always going to look out for themselves and they are always going to find ways to make money. If you don't let them buy out their competition no one dares become competition.

the division on this issue seems to be like the division on most issues it false along party lines but not because people are being loyal to Democrats or Republicans I don't think that really plays into this.

You expressed that large corporations are licking their chops they're going to do that anyway they're going to make money they run the show. And it seems to be people who lean a little more left take issue with that.
Click to expand...

The FCC head has already made it clear that he doesn’t believe rules are necessary to ensure fair and open access, which includes whatever means necessary to prevent throttling, content control, etc. What rules do you believe will exist after the repeal?

I live in a rural area where I have 2 choices for an ISP. One is a radio wireless Internet company, which I use. The other is “satellite Internet” which is horrible for several reasons (including peak time throttling) and more expensive.

And I don’t see this to be a left/right - Democrat/Republican issue. I see this as a special interests/greed issue. Every person in our government will sell their grandmas for a buck.

Right/Left - Democrats/Republicans nonsenses is a shell game for voters. The different factions are vying for special interests money to sustain their lifestyle and future opportunities once the Washington Royalty leaves office.

I really don’t understand people who don’t grasp the saying, “Power corrupts.” That’s not a “left” perspective. It’s a reality. It’s a historical fact.

I trust nobody in government at any level or branch or bureaucracy. And I sure as hell don’t trust large companies’ promises to be fair and consumer friendly.
 
Absolutely in favor of net neutrality. The reasons are painfully obvious to anyone with 3 or more functioning synaptic connections. If you don't see why net neutrality is essential, I will be happy to explain it to you.
 
Removable Mind said:
The FCC head has already made it clear that he doesn’t believe rules are necessary to ensure fair and open access, which includes whatever means necessary to prevent throttling, content control, etc. What rules do you believe will exist after the repeal?
Click to expand...
the rules of the dollar you can go to a different ISP there aren't any now because they're not able to compete with the big guy.

I live in a rural area where I have 2 choices for an ISP. One is a radio wireless Internet company, which I use. The other is “satellite Internet” which is horrible for several reasons (including peak time throttling) and more expensive.

And I don’t see this to be a left/right - Democrat/Republican issue. I see this as a special interests/greed issue. Every person in our government will sell their grandmas for a buck.
Click to expand...
so why on Earth is it a good idea to give them control over the internet?

Right/Left - Democrats/Republicans nonsenses is a shell game for voters. The different factions are vying for special interests money to sustain their lifestyle and future opportunities once the Washington Royalty leaves office.
Click to expand...
I wasn't saying this was a right left issue was just explaining why it seems that way.

I really don’t understand people who don’t grasp the saying, “Power corrupts.” That’s not a “left” perspective. It’s a reality. It’s a historical fact.
Click to expand...
I agree so I still don't understand why you would want to give government the power to control the internet.

I trust nobody in government at any level or branch or bureaucracy. And I sure as hell don’t trust large companies’ promises to be fair and consumer friendly.
Click to expand...
I think I would have less trust for the government because the government exists in spite of you companies exist because of you.

I don't want one company having enormous amounts of power. This is why I'm against net neutrality because it gives one company power. If you make rules saying you can't sell to the big guy nobody will even get into the market because the risk is too great. Your options are being the next to big guy or going bankrupt it's lose-lose so no one would do it.

I am typically against government interference because they exist in spite of us not because of us. A company's interest Maybe profits but they still have to deliver something profitable to make profit.
 
CLAX1911 said:
the rules of the dollar you can go to a different ISP there aren't any now because they're not able to compete with the big guy.

so why on Earth is it a good idea to give them control over the internet?

I wasn't saying this was a right left issue was just explaining why it seems that way.

I agree so I still don't understand why you would want to give government the power to control the internet.


I think I would have less trust for the government because the government exists in spite of you companies exist because of you.

I don't want one company having enormous amounts of power. This is why I'm against net neutrality because it gives one company power. If you make rules saying you can't sell to the big guy nobody will even get into the market because the risk is too great. Your options are being the next to big guy or going bankrupt it's lose-lose so no one would do it.

I am typically against government interference because they exist in spite of us not because of us. A company's interest Maybe profits but they still have to deliver something profitable to make profit.
Click to expand...

So it’s back to an either or situation. Government control or corporate control.

Thanks, all either of have the power to do is see what happens if the repeal happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom