The Obama Internet

Alan is not a proponent of American exceptionalism I see.

Go Latvia!

And of course geographic size doesn't explain why we pay so much more.

Of course population density and geography can explain why some here pay more. It costs less to serve a densely populated area. Simple economics. It's no coincidence that all of the countries ahead of us in average speed are far more densely populated.

More government control of the Internet is a bad idea for a lot of reasons. It may start off benign, but like most everything else the regulators touch, it won't be long and they'll be micromanaging it with another 20,000 pages of new rules....and that won't be good for speed or cost or technological advancements...Wait until they decide pornography on the Internet doesn't serve the public good. I imagine you'll really need more tissue then...well maybe not more...

Just remember what the Internet is really for...


What the Internet is for

Not one person in opposition of net-neutrality on this thread can address the specific reason as to why. (Are we shocked?) They only offer abstract arguments about their ideology of government in the economy.

The specific question at hand is very simple. DO you believe your Internet Service Provider should be allowed to block, slow, or otherwise interfere with your desire to visit any legal, registered website of your choosing? This is a rhetorical question for anyone remotely interested in living in a consumer-empowered nation.

Our resident conservatives warn about the government determining where we can go on the internet. There is absolutely nothing in the proposed policy that constitutes that. Not one thing...but that's the strawman they point to - Something that's not even in the policy. Next thing you know they will be arguing against the death panels in Obamacare

By not having net-neutrality your ISP may determine where you go on the internet. I cant possibly imagine the argument to defend such control - especially from people who just got done complaining about having their access controlled. But then again, Obama is for net neutrality so that trumps everything.

If you don't like how you're being treated by your ISP then change your ISP. That's real consumer-empowerment. More regulations create barriers to entry and end up reducing consumer choice.

The real question isn't some simple new policy. It's whether the Federal Government should regulate another industry and create the corresponding bureaucracy that goes along with it. I'm very happy with my Internet thank you.

Where can I read the 302 page proposal? Where can anyone read it?

Just curious, does government do anything better than can be done by the private sector?

Ok, we can agree to disagree. You have massive reservations about the government determining what you have access to (even though thats not On the table) ..but You're cool with a corporation imposing the same restrictions (and that is on the table). Ok then.

DonDiego proposes permitting free market forces to determine what services the providers provide and what services the users use and at what prices each is willing to provide such services and each is willing to purchase such services.
It is what markets do best, . . . and what bureaucrats do worst.

I live in a relatively large city and "the market" of high speed internet providers is 2 entities. Some areas only have one high speed provider. And some areas dont have any. bummer, huh.? especially if their isp decides to limit access.

Yeah, deregulating banking did wonders for the stock market.