I agree to Idea Net Neutrality = A Protected Internet
Voting Disabled

152 votes

I disagree to Idea Net Neutrality = A Protected Internet

Rank 24


This idea is active.
The Open Internet & the Freedom of Speech »

Net Neutrality = A Protected Internet



Submitted by 5 years ago

Comments (10)

  1. Increasing government control over the Internet will harm the communication infrastructure.

    We need freedom on the internet. The only rules needed are the fundamental rules that come from natural law. Do what your agree to do. Do not steal. And so on.

    Any step in government control will be followed by more, often to "patch up" the problems of the first step. Soon control will be extremely complicated, pushing out the small guys. Cronyism will increase. Regulations will be enforced in ways we did not expect. There will be unintended consequences (see Economics in One Lesson by Hazlit).

    Let the market work. We have seen how unbalanced regs and over regulation has harmed the economy.

    5 years ago
  2. david.wyly Idea Submitter

    You're right, we do need freedom on the internet. And that includes restricting corporations from manipulating their consumers with multiple tiered services, bandwidth throttling and content prioritization.

    Allow for internet service providers to give priority to one web site over another isn't "freedom."

    Let the market work? Have you seen what they've done with adjustable rate mortgages and credit default swaps? There's a reason why the stock market crumbled today, just as it did on black Friday: because we didn't have enough regulatory protections to stop predatory market tactics such as these.

    5 years ago
  3. Proponents of Net Neutrality rules have failed to show they are needed.

    1. They have failed to show that the established protection against fraud and breach of contract are insufficient. They have not throughly pushed in those routes. This, of course, will be hard for them to show.

    2. They have failed to show that reasonable efforts to remove subsidies and rules limiting competition have been made. Economists have shown that this is is where most of the problems are. I'm not saying they have to remove all of those, that is hard, but they should at least show a reasonable effort.

    3. They have failed to show that Net Neutrality rules would actually bring about any neutrality on the Internet. They have not enumerated the side-effects of such rules.

    4. Through the harm of taxes and borrowing, government spending costs lives. Proponents of Net Neutrality have not shown that the benefits will be worth those lives lost (as in lives saved, for example).

    5. They have not sufficiently pursued consumer information methods and certification. They have not demonstrated that these are inadequate, with or without the above methods.

    This is just the first 5, but it is enough for now.

    Essentially, proponents of Net Neutrality have not even tried to make things better.

    5 years ago
  4. Dar is very active on this board and it seems like (s)he is VERY convinced that we should let big business keep running the show.

    We should all hold these companies accountable when BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars are granted to them for infrastructure upgrades and they come back with weak arguments when the FCC questioned where it is all going. Just take a look at how these very same companies have destroyed the mobile market. If we let them bully their way into the rule making process with the Internet, we will surely have the most fragmented, closed, and slowest Internet of any developed nation. European countries are changing their constitutions to state that free Internet access is a human right; while we argue how to let our ISPs divide and conquer it.

    5 years ago
  5. No, it's a Bill of Control for the Government, which is a Bad Thing.

    4 years ago
  6. I trust greedy corporations, and I want them to make lots and lots of money. That's how America grows.

    Government has grown too greedy, and produces nothing but dependency and bureaucrats.

    The internet is free now.


    4 years ago
  7. david.wyly Idea Submitter

    Yeah, honeyducote, your logic is irrefutable *rolleyes* At first I took your argument for sarcasm. Then I came to the haunting realization that you were, in fact, being serious. Very disconcerting for me to know that there are people out there so anti-government that they'd rather have unfettered hyper-capitalism at its extreme.

    America in the late 1800s was plagued by uncontrolled, untethered hyper-capitalism. Monopolies, 18 hour workdays, child labor, etc etc. Government stepped in to provide better working conditions. Unions tried to fill the void where the government refused to touch. Eventually, government regulations caused unions to become more and more obsolete. It shows how government has worked to protect workers.

    Hyper-capitalism is as bad as any other 'ism' out there. Fascism, communism, socialism -- you name it. Anything in its extreme is BAD.

    I don't understand why people are so ridiculously afraid of any form of government regulation what-so-ever. It's absolutely absurd. Yes, governments tend to be bloated, inefficient and mired with politics and bureaucracy. The founding fathers had this in mind when they formed our central government -- that is, balancing the powers of government so that it wasn't abused. It wasn't supposed to be easy to get things done. It was DESIGNED to be as inefficient as possible. You're missing the point and making the assumption that this reaches to other branches of government.

    However, the notion that ANYTHING government touches is inefficient and bureaucratic is just silly and unrealistic. Your roads are paved with quality and forethought. Your kids are guaranteed a 21st century education. Your mail is delivered with efficiency and haste. Your streets are safe thanks to police on the beat. Your house is protected by the fire department. Millions of seniors are given affordable, quality healthcare and social security benefits. Stock market regulation keeps the markets from collapsing in on themselves, ala the 1930s. Bank regulation and guarantees keep people from making panicked runs on the banks. The government keeps you safe with the military. The government regulates your utilities so you don't have monopolies charging your $1,000/month for electricity, water and gas. The government subsidizes higher-education to keep our millions of college graduates competitive in the 21st century.


    Oh, wait, I would never actually say that, because I don't believe that my silly opinion is absolutely 100% gospel. I try to keep an open mind and realize that I don't know everything. But thanks for playing.

    4 years ago
  8. Cut and paste

    That was your open mind?

    4 years ago
  9. david.wyly Idea Submitter

    No, I just wrote it, now, for you. Do a google search with bits of my rant in quotes. You won't find it anywhere.

    That the best you got?

    4 years ago


    4 years ago

Vote Activity Show

(latest 20 votes)