- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: Why Progressives Lervvv Net Neutrality
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:06 am to ScoopAndScore
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:06 am to ScoopAndScore
Have to also pay for the ability to use netflix to my ISP
1
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:07 am to Greace
quote:
ATT and Comcast are 1/5th the size of Amazon and Netflix?
Comcast Market Cap $184B
ATT $232B
Amazon $565B
Google $739B
Yeah. You're right. Netflix isn't. Got me.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:12 am to Greace
So higher cost for entertainment right?
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:12 am to Wednesday
quote:
Some businesses take up more bandwidth than others. Obama decided to protect these businesses by telling you he was protecting you.
I think its absolutely hilarious the people so fired up over MSM "fake news" now have decided that the owners of these networks (cable companies) are worth defending and support their interests.
CNN=Bad
TimeWarner=Good
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:14 am to Wednesday
quote:So we're the aristocrats?
the rest of you patricians
Look shite up before you use it in a diatribe.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:15 am to blueboy
quote:
So we're the aristocrats?
The peasants are entitled to their rabble
.Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:16 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:Well that's because you are confused.
I think its absolutely hilarious the people so fired up over MSM "fake news" now have decided that the owners of these networks (cable companies) are worth defending and support their interests.
I have zero love for cable companies.
That's 99% of the whole sky screamer problem. They think this is about picking sides relating to Comcast.
And, they think that it is a logical argument that just because a bad guy wants something, it has to be bad.
Hell. Mussolini wanted the trains to run on time. He was fricking right!
This is why you can dismiss OUT OF HAND any and all "but so so wants it so you must be dumb for wanting it too" arguments.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:16 am to ScoopAndScore
Why do we need higher cost for entertainment? Why does my internet price need to go up? Why does a company that made over 2 billon dollars suddenly need to be able to charge me more?
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:21 am to Greace
quote:You do realize that when you use these words, you are not talking about economics anymore, you are simply talking about feelings.
Why do we need higher cost for entertainment? Why does my internet price need to go up?
There's no such thing as a price "needing" to be a certain thing.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:21 am to ShortyRob
The world where the companies in question are the same as the Cable companies that already have some of the worst consumer ratings on the planet.
Blind fool.
Blind fool.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:21 am to Greace
quote:
Thats why most republications also dont support the repeal? Because its a leftist argument
There are plenty of big government Republicans who unfortunately support the leftist idea that its perfectly ok for the government to put its hand on the scale of negotiations between private businesses and favor one over the other.
Democrats do it more often because they are socialists by another name, but really fricking stupid Republicans are so dumb and/or corrupt that they don’t acknowledge that they are doing it too.
Net Neutrality isn’t neutral. Net Neutrality tipped the scales in favor of “cool” businesses that SJWs love and believe are altruistic and against ones that everyone needs but that are not “cool” and frankly suck to be around - cable companies.
SJWs and Democrats bitch and moan when Rs want to pass laws that give economic advantages to not in the cool club businesses (example evil Big Oil). These Democrats/socialists usually argue that those businesses are meanies because it makes more sense to people who are not thinking it thru. But when it comes right down to it, when Rs pass laws that economically benefit the businesses they like (1) it’s still leftist; and (2) Democrats and leftists don’t want to admit that they don’t like it - because it hurts their power base. So instead they say it hurts “the little guy.”
I don’t feel sorry for ISP companies or content providers worth billions of dollars. They can take care of themselves in their arms length negotiations. They don’t need laws to protect them.
I don’t think anybody should have to be forced to favor one over the other with their hard earned money.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:22 am to ShortyRob
quote:
And, they think that it is a logical argument that just because a bad guy wants something, it has to be bad.
No, the logical argument is that if you let the same people who give you fake news also control what they want you to have access to, you might have a problem.
If for example the areas across the country that have access to one provider (lets say TimeWarner) only give access to their network (CNN) and their preferred candidate (HRC), you dont think that would have impacted the election?
Or do you think the slighted customers would have simply resorted to 56k modems and mailed in checks to the Trump campaign?
This post was edited on 12/15/17 at 10:24 am
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:23 am to Tigerdev
quote:
The world where the companies in question are the same as the Cable companies that already have some of the worst consumer ratings on the planet.
Cool. I don't like em either. I kind of like an environment where the bigger dogs(the ones you love) might choose to get engaged in dealing with their pests. Something they will NEVER do if they get the government to do it for them.
quote:
Blind fool.
Economics. Love it.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:23 am to ShortyRob
Shorty Rob. I think i love You.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:24 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
No, the logical argument is that if you let the same people who give you fake news also control what they want you to have access to, you might have a problem.
Nope
quote:
If for example the areas across the country that have access to one provider (lets say TimeWarner) only give access to their network (CNN) and their preferred candidate (HRC), you dont think that would have impacted the election?
Yep. It would.
I mean. I can make up scary shite too I suppose.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:26 am to ShortyRob
Please make up scary shite that having NN could cause
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:27 am to ShortyRob
I kind of like being in an environment where access to information and opportunities for small businesses arent controlled by a handful of companies with the worst track records of any large businesses in the United States. Call me crazy.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:27 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Cool. I don't like em either. I kind of like an environment where the bigger dogs(the ones you love) might choose to get engaged in dealing with their pests. Something they will NEVER do if they get the government to do it for them.
To add to this point.
Google and Amazon especially have a shite ton of capital. More importantly, they have ACCESS to a shite ton more by virtue of their size.
Now, they're like any other company. They want to only engage their capital where they must.
These are companies that look at Comcast as basically a flea. An annoyance. An annoyance that is destined, long term to get it's arse kicked by the new kids on the block.
But that arse kicking WILL cost money and the new kids, being smart frickers with tons of money.......figured out that a far more effective(cheap) way to accomplish this task was to simply get the government to do the dirty work for them.
But, they're going to kick their arse regardless.
How you frickers don't see it, I have no idea.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:28 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Nope
quote:
Yep. It would.
I mean. I can make up scary shite too I suppose.
Yet you have difficulty explaining how legally this can't happen.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:29 am to Greace
quote:
Why do we need higher cost for entertainment?
Ah, the 'fairness' argument.
It was only a matter of time.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News