FCC wins........

[ImmortalFlame]

As I've already covered, heavy bandwidth users can be managed better.
They can either be slowed, allowing others more elbow room, or they
can pay for the extra resources used.

So who does allowing that benefit?

 

[Stevicus]

Nah. An alternative will be forced to enter the arena. Elon Musk has already been developing a satellite constellation to provide internet at an alternative. Current launch date is estimated to be around 2019-2020.

Another way might be for the government to bring back the Office of Price Administration.

 

[Revoltingest]

Corporations ARE the government.

The problems with our country are not rocket science. The lobbyists force the politicians to pass laws creating cartels and monopolies in exchange for campaign financing. The lobbyists own the politicians. And the CEOs own the lobbyists. The elimination of net neutrality in putting laws in place that favor the corporations is just another example of the corporations ARE the government. Money talks, everything else is just BS.

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." Benito Mussolini

That's one way to see it.
And sometimes corporations are involved in governmental corruption.
But the solution here is to vote crony capitalists out of office, eg, Hillary,
and prosecute where corruption is found.

 

[Revoltingest]

So who does allowing that benefit?

I don't understand the request.

 

[Revoltingest]

No reason why they both can't be shady.

Aye, but the wonderful thing about corporations I dislike, eg, General Electric,
is that I can deny them my business. Can't do that with government.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I don't understand the request.

Who benefits from managing heavy bandwidth users better?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Maybe the churches could start providing internet. Its an important resource. It would make sense.

 

[Revoltingest]

Who benefits from managing heavy bandwidth users better?

We consumers who dislike traffic jams.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

We consumers who dislike traffic jams.

Is there currently a problem with this that cannot be solved without compromising net neutrality and doesn't heavily favour the wealthy?

 

[Revoltingest]

Is there currently a problem with this that cannot be solved without compromising net neutrality and doesn't heavily favour the wealthy?

We shall see if the change favors the wealthy or not.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

We shall see if the change favors the wealthy or not.

Fair enough.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

LOL

I always get a laugh out of this place.

Victory for the free market. DOOM.

 

[Stanyon]

It's pretty simple for me really, I don't use the Internet that much so if they want to charge more than I am willing to pay then I will cancel it and I am pretty sure I am not alone in this.

 

[metis]

Its just one more item with President Obama's signature that Trump has to erase.

Yes, as we see progress being replaced by regress.

 

[metis]

I am just knee-jerky because I don't trust corporations motivated by shareholder profit to make any sort of ethical decision.

Exactly, which is why I'm always hesitant to vote for a businessman/woman since they're paradigm is more of "the art of the deal", namely doing whatever to sell the product no matter how effect or defective it might be. Take a look at Trump's "ethics" as a case in point.

 

[metis]

Why would anyone who's truly concerned about "crony capitalism" vote for Trump?

 

[Revoltingest]

It's pretty simple for me really, I don't use the Internet that much so if they want to charge more than I am willing to pay then I will cancel it and I am pretty sure I am not alone in this.

Contrary to what many believe, net neutrality doesn't regulate
prices to the consumer. (Aye, I've had such conversations.)

 

[Twilight Hue]

Exactly, which is why I'm always hesitant to vote for a businessman/woman since they're paradigm is more of "the art of the deal", namely doing whatever to sell the product no matter how effect or defective it might be. Take a look at Trump's "ethics" as a case in point.

Like lawyers have better "ethics". Lol

 

[Revoltingest]

Like lawyers have better "ethics". Lol

Ever see the UofM Law School ethics exam?

One question......
Hypothetically, you're sitting at your desk, meeting with a new client.
The client hands you a crisp new $100 bill for an hour of your time.
(The question hasn't been adjusted for inflation.)
You discuss the issues, the hour has ended, & business is concluded.
The client is about to close your office door behind him, when you notice
that he accidentally had a 2nd $100 bill stuck underneath the intended
payment. You must address this error.
Question...
Do you inform your partner about the extra $100?

Old Revoltistanian maxim.....
Tis cheaper to be cheated by a business, than get good service from a lawyer.

 

[fantome profane]

Contrary to what many believe, net neutrality doesn't regulate
prices to the consumer. (Aye, I've had such conversations.)

With net neutrality the internet providers can set the prices based on the amount and speed of information, but not base on the content of the information. So yes, in that sense it does regulate the price. It regulates what the price can be based on.