End of Net Neutrality

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Nah man. Your layout must be different from mine. Plus three can't be considered many, bro.

This is what's at the top:

Here's three more- Gary Becker, Dennis Carlton and Hal S. Sider. Is six many?

http://www.livemint.com/Industry/hz8...eutrality.html

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Nah man. Your layout must be different from mine. Plus three can't be considered many, bro.

This is what's at the top:

Number seven- Robert J. Samuelson

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/031...son030515.php3

[2shameless]

That link doesn't work.

http://www.aei.org/publication/net-n...conomics-says/

Yes it does.

[Hype job]

Then you should have refuted it with ease. Instead you resorted to insults.

Remember; "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." -Socrates

Or to put it another way, when one resorts to insult they have conceded the debate.

He didn't refute ****. He just wrote his own opinions on the matter.

So you have no answer to my question. Because you only support this because Trump is in favor of it and you're a Trump superfan.

[Hype job]

Some regulation is always needed for safety standards and without regulations there would be monopolies. There's a reason why Congress passed the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and then the Clayton Anti-Trust Act. Teddy Roosevelt, one of the greatest US presidents was known as a trust buster and broke up monopolies. He was a pro-business guy, and understood their role in driving the US economy, but he also believed in fair play in the free market.

I am usually for less regulations to spur growth and innovation, however, from my understanding the ISPs have monopolies in many areas and hence why there is net neutrality. If there was indeed a true free market where there are numerous ISPs coming into existence, I would say get rid of Net neutrality, but since there isn't, this is needed. Comcast was known to screw over people, if Comcast had played by the unwritten rules, net neutrality wouldn't be in existence. But it always take one a-sshole to screw it up for everyone.

This is what I respect. People who let their own logical intuition override party fanboyism. Kudos to you for not being a superfan unlike some posters on here.

[Hype job]

We don't have self-imposed regulations. As I explained earlier, we let the consumers, ie the free market, decide. And that is what I advocate

That's who 'regulates' us, if you must use that word. If they don't like something, they don't buy it, and we either improve it or make something else.

You're hung up on semantics and a term you inserted, while I'm simply explaining how a free market free of Gov't regulation works.

The bottom line is people like me are advocating letting the consumers decide what is produced. You want politicians and bureaucrats to make those decisions.

Listen, take in what I say, and address it. You're playing semantics demanding I use certain terms you think will score you Gotcha! points and it's bogging down the discourse.

Correct.

The consumer decides, not the Gov't in terms of cell phones. And look at the innovation we've seen on them.

Learn from success, don't try and find ways to ignore and negate it to win an Internet disagreement.



See above. You're stuck on this stupid Gotcha! term.

I advocate NO regulations. I am for letting the free market decide. For some reason you're demanding I give you examples of "self-regulating" when I never called for such a thing.

Come off it and address what I say. Stop trying to pigeon-hole my responses so you can rebut them. Rebut my stances as I present them, not what you want them to be.

There's no such thing as a 'Free market'. Not in any civilized country with laws and regulations that citizens and companies must abide by. There hasn't been a so called free market for at least 100 years, and that's a good thing. It's an abstract concept, nothing more.

The closest thing to a true free market would be Somalia and Bangladesh. No one wants to live in some ****hole where corporations have no sensible regulations to abide by and **** like this happens
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_S...lding_collapse

[BoxingTech718]

He didn't refute ****. He just wrote his own opinions on the matter.

So you have no answer to my question. Because you only support this because Trump is in favor of it and you're a Trump superfan.

Bingo, ther it is in a nutshell.

That is why I believe political parties should be abolished.

Politicians should be loyal to only the people of the country.

Not to corporations or special interests

[Tony Trick-Pony]

This is what I respect. People who let their own logical intuition override party fanboyism. Kudos to you for not being a superfan unlike some posters on here.

Brainwashed leftist...

[siablo14]

http://www.aei.org/publication/net-n...conomics-says/

Yes it does.

No it doesn't. It says one more step.

[siablo14]

Here's three more- Gary Becker, Dennis Carlton and Hal S. Sider. Is six many?

http://www.livemint.com/Industry/hz8...eutrality.html

Number seven- Robert J. Samuelson

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/031...son030515.php3

I will get to reading these but this puts us at five including the first link. I guess five is many to you. Cool though.