re: Don’t Blame Big Cable. It’s Local Governments That Choke Broadband Competition

quote:

---

that why we elected trump you shill

---

Yeah, he's really impacted lobbying.

quote:

---

nobody cared about NN before, not sure why they care so much now

---

Because a federal agency up and deemed themselves to have the power to regulate something.

frick that shite.

quote:

---

There's no good way, and blaming one branch while being like, "yay capitalism" for the other won't work

---

the "free" in "free trade" implies a lack of government

that applies at the local, state, federal, and international levels

quote:

---

The spirit of which is to protect people from tyranny. Where does lobbyists paying politicians millions of dollars to get their way fit into that equation exactly?

---

it's called the expansion of government into a form the FF protected against (but courts eventually ignored after threats by progressives)

if government lacks the power, lobbyists won't be spending that money because there is no ultimate benefit for that investment

quote:

---

Telecoms have paid off the fedgov with huge amounts of money, and stifled local govs with huge amounts of money. So the answer is give the keys to telecoms, I guess?

---

What are they paying for? Favors that benefit them right? So the answer isn’t “giving the keys to the telecoms but to free the market and allow competition to come in so people have options.

How does TMobile giving away audio streaming hurt consumers? Or MetroPCS not counting YouTube streaming against your data? If you want to watch other services either it counts against your data or you can use another carrier.

quote:

---

the "free" in "free trade" implies a lack of government

that applies at the local, state, federal, and international levels

---

It still baffles me how so many people shite on the free market for failing, when there is no free market for that good/service/industry.

Thank you mr Comcast.

This is what I have been trying to tell the "net neutrality" people here for years.

Net Nutrality people want government regulation of free speech and wanted the government to treat the internet as a utility. A stupid goal favored only by those who would profit by such activity.

Too bad more energy and effort has not been directed at the local governments so that more competition would be in place.

This is simple minded nonsense.. the constitution is a fricking regulatory document. It works pretty fricking good. Using an example from work..

Bad regulation: "Here's a 200 page document detailing the specific steps and reporting requirements you swear to abide by to prevent the discharge of pollutants into a stream used for potable water."

Better/good regulation: "Unless reasonable/prudent measures were taken where practicable it is illegal/unlawful for any person to discharge pollutants into a stream used for potable water."

Regulating ISPs under Title II could be an unnecessary burden and is probably not the best way to serve consumer interests or to foster competition. Simple regulation requiring all 'internet traffic' to be treated equally would be far more effective especially when ISPs are given an out for something like 'proposed services/packages involving zero-rating/paid prioritization/fast lanes/etc can be authorized by the FTC if the proposed service is not anti-competition and after a 30-day public comment period'

quote:

---

also, Comcast works its magic...at the local level. so how am i indirectly supporting Comcast for criticizing them for their most crucial negative behavior related to the free flow of broadband?

---

net neutrality principles are easily compatible with free market competition fostered by deregulation at the local level. also compatible with tiered internet access and other package deals