- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:09 pm to Dale51
Very few people live without the internet nowadays
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:10 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:The crazies on here don't understand that concept. The second they see the word "government," they immediately retaliate using whatever nonsensical logic they can spew so long as it involves limiting the government's role. They'd rather take it raw in the butt from a corporation all day long than so much as consider that government is sometimes the lesser of two evils.
Saying government regulation is never the answer is just as myopic and absurd as saying government regulation is always the answer
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 5:11 pm
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:11 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
And functioning in the modern world without internet is a very difficult proposition
How so? The internet is simply entertainment to me. If I don't want to "pay the price", but need to order something online, I'll go to the library and use their service for free. What is it that you actually NEED the internet for to live a day of your life?
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:14 pm to PointsInCase
quote:
The crazies on here don't understand that concept. The second they see the word "government," they immediately retaliate using whatever nonsensical logic they can spew so long as it involves limiting the government's role.
Ironically enough most "small govt" conservatives love them some big govt. Just ask them about mandatory minimums, warrantless surveillance, FISA, and how much power they want to give LEO.
Also, the ironic part is, imagine if you have only one provider (Comcast), and election time rolls around. Which media will they want you to watch? Fox? Or MSNBC and NBC which they own? What about streaming content?
Is it that hard to imagine that the same networks that were pushing HRC will now shove it down the throats of their internet subscribers?
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:14 pm to Yak
quote:
Because it's your only choice...
No it's not. frick it, is also a choice, is it not?
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:14 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
He’s taking power AWAY from himself why wouldn’t I trust someone that wants to give himself less power.
And to his “former” employer. The guy is a mole, and it couldn’t be anymore fricking obvious unless he looked like this:
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 5:15 pm
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:15 pm to PointsInCase
quote:
Dude, wireless carriers are also ISPs.
Right there is competition among ISPs so if someone is blocking or throttling certain sites or content then another will not and can attract new customers.
quote:.
They are going to control content so that they can make more money. You do this by essentially limiting the exposure of "mom-and-pop" websites in favor of income generating and data collecting websites, which gives the e-commerce giants like Amazon a big leg up over the smaller retailers.
That would only work if you have no other option of ISP. Amazon has a leg up already because they offer cheaper faster service.
quote:
They can also push a political agenda and/or require consumers to pay additional fees to access certain content. There really aren't any benefits for the consumer in all of this
And why exactly would they do that? Especially if I have at least 4-5 major wireless carriers to choose from.
quote:
ISPs generally suck and operate in monopolies in many markets
And we get to the heart of it ISPs are unpopular. But their monopoly status was 100% created by governments. End those and allow more choices. Markets enforce discipline if Verizon is pissing me off for whatever reason I can switch to Sprint or TMobile. Which gives them an incentive to offer me more for less not the other way around. If someone charges more for Netflix and I know that I can choose another provider if I don’t like that.
quote:
I'm not sure why giving them more power can be considered a good thing.
I fail to see how giving government more power is considered a good thing
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:16 pm to Greace
quote:
Very few people live without the internet nowadays
So what? Do they NEED it?? If so, buy it. If not, move on with life.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:18 pm to Dale51
quote:sure it is, but that choice would cause me to lose my job, house, etc
No it's not. frick it, is also a choice, is it not?
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:19 pm to Dale51
quote:
So what? Do they NEED it?? If so, buy it. If not, move on with life.
This is a great way to look at something that 99% of America uses every day.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:21 pm to Yak
quote:
sure it is, but that choice would cause me to lose my job, house, etc
That seems like an irrational fear, imo. Why would your employer not compensate for any increased cost of doing business just like any other necessary cost??
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:22 pm to Dale51
Who said I was an employee?
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:23 pm to Greace
quote:
This is a great way to look at something that 99% of America uses every day.
So what? If the individual deems it necessary in order to get thru their day, they will pay a small? increase in cost. If they don't they call the provider and say "Cancel my service". Why is this complicated??
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:25 pm to Yak
quote:
Who said I was an employee?
Doesn't matter, the concept is the same. Are you saying that you--in whatever business you are in--never increased cost to reflect the increased costs of doing business??? If so, that seems odd.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:26 pm to Dale51
This is a terrible argument to have
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:27 pm to Greace
quote:
This is a terrible argument to have
How so? Be as specific as possible.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:29 pm to Dale51
quote:Of course I would, because i have no choice...hence why I originally said I'll get screwed over.
Doesn't matter, the concept is the same. Are you saying that you--in whatever business you are in--never increased cost to reflect the increased costs of doing business??? If so, that seems odd.
Glad we cleared that up
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:29 pm to Dale51
The consumer is being screwed
Posted on 12/14/17 at 5:33 pm to Yak
quote:
Of course I would, because i have no choice...hence why I originally said I'll get screwed over.
This makes no sense, imo. How..if you pass the cost to your clients..are you "getting screwed"?? Your bottom line would remain the same. (actually may increase)
Page 7 of 8
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News