- Apr 30, 2009
- Reaction score
This is a distraction. Granting private companies a monopoly is the problem. That is your issue.Half the country doesn't. And much of the half that does, the other ISP is the phone company with DSL which is far inferior. Arguing that we should go back and re-do the infrastructure of cable/internet/power/water lines is a pointless as arguing for private roads.
The reality is that most Americans only have one good option for high speed internet, water and electricity granting that company a monopoly and rendering the free market inefficient. Hence the need for regulation. Some regulations are bad. But not all of them are. Net neutrality was not a bad regulation. I ask again, what benefit will be seen from this repeal? Name one thing. So far you do nothing but duck the question.
The choices are:
grant them a monopoly and then have government manage thru regs.
Don’t grant them a monopoly, let competition and the free market deliver internet service.
I much prefer the latter. Another poster stated that these monopolies are state and local, not federal. That calls for a state and local solution, not federal.
NN would be subject to the law of unintended consequences. Progs like you just always assume the reg will solve the problem with no other effects. Experience is very very different. It will lead to more regs and more control. It always does. You could not find a single industry where this isn’t the case.
And the first reg is always in response to an imaginary minor issue, as this is. There are no problems. People are happy. This was sold to them not demanded by them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk