Quote:Just like with the ACA, they didn't give us all the details and now everyone decries it as horrible legislation. So why the heck doesn't anyone question them doing it all over again. Don't give me a highlight real, tell me what your really doing then we can figure out if its good or not.
If by everyone you mean predominantly the right then yes, everyone. The president pushed vocally for this so you know , they simply must yell about it because everything MUST be partisan.
It has been reported by the tech sites that have read it that the majority of the 300 pages are legal explanations of the like that the court needs to see to not overturn it based on law suites like the last time the telecoms sued. This was commented on by the judge that ruled in the telecoms favor the last time the FCC tried to push net neutrality.
Quote:That fact sheet goes over what the rules do and what they do not do.
How many 300+ page government reports have you actually read? I mean you bring up the ACA, but have you actually read it?
Me personally not a single one, but that's not the problem. No one outside of the FCC has seen those regulations, for all we know it could say the FCC now has the right to determine what political speech is acceptable and will sensor the internet, I'm simply saying we don't know what the hell they just did yet.
You're the one claiming it's a good thing, I'm saying lets see whats in those hidden 300 pages first. Government doesn't exactly get the benefit of the doubt with me.
Quote:How many have you read? They do say "The Devil is in the details" A 4 page synopsis is not going to cut it with me. Give me the whole damn thing. Not this "We need to pass it so we'll know what's in it" Bull. Is this like "If you like your internet you can keep your internet?"
I'm not the one complaining that it's not available.
So I take it you've read the entire ACA? Did you completely understand it?
This wasn't "We need to pass it so we'll know what's in it". All the people actually voting on it had access to all 300 some pages of it three weeks ago.
Quote:If by everyone you mean predominantly the right then yes, everyone. The president pushed vocally for this so you know , they simply must yell about it because everything MUST be partisan.
It has been reported by the tech sites that have read it that the majority of the 300 pages are legal explanations of the like that the court needs to see to not overturn it based on law suites like the last time the telecoms sued. This was commented on by the judge that ruled in the telecoms favor the last time the FCC tried to push net neutrality.
No even the most liberal of people I know call it a cluster mess. We've even had discussions on here about how it tries to play the middle and ends up just being a subsidy for big insurance, no one but the insurance companies won with the ACA. So why does everyone assume Government is being bought and paid for by big business this time around either?
The old saying "I'm from the Government and I'm here to help" comes to mind. Just asks the Indians how well that worked out.
Quote:No even the most liberal of people I know call it a cluster mess. We've even had discussions on here about how it tries to play the middle and ends up just being a subsidy for big insurance, no one but the insurance companies won with the ACA. So why does everyone assume Government is being bought and paid for by big business this time around either?
Their are zero similarities. You should probably be more triggered by the right flipping it's wig over this in general. Calling it the obama care of the internet? Come on now. Why are they trying to scare you.... And why is it working?
Quote:Me personally not a single one, but that's not the problem. No one outside of the FCC has seen those regulations, for all we know it could say the FCC now has the right to determine what political speech is acceptable and will sensor the internet, I'm simply saying we don't know what the hell they just did yet.
You're the one claiming it's a good thing, I'm saying lets see whats in those hidden 300 pages first. Government doesn't exactly get the benefit of the doubt with me.
Then what's wrong with a four page summary? It's 300 pages, but a lot of that is going to be government speak that is like a college student trying to make his paper longer by explaining about everything that he's explaining about, and defining everything he's explaining.
Quote:Their are zero similarities. You should probably be more triggered by the right flipping it's wig over this in general. Calling it the obama care of the internet? Come on now. Why are they trying to scare you.... And why is it working?
History, anytime they pass something before making it public it's never turned out good.
Quote:Then what's wrong with a four page summary? It's 300 pages, but a lot of that is going to be government speak that is like a college student trying to make his paper longer by explaining about everything that he's explaining about, and defining everything he's explaining.
Time will tell, hopefully they can resist the urge to sensor the internet. I don't trust power, and the FCC just gained a whole lot of power.
Quote:Time will tell, hopefully they can resist the urge to sensor the internet. I don't trust power, and the FCC just gained a whole lot of power.
Less power (as stated by the fact sheet if you bothered to read it) than they have over mobile phones, and other utilities.
Quote:History, anytime they pass something before making it public it's never turned out good.
Time will tell, hopefully they can resist the urge to sensor the internet. I don't trust power, and the FCC just gained a whole lot of power.
you must be really mad about the TPP then.
Quote:Less power (as stated by the fact sheet if you bothered to read it) than they have over mobile phones, and other utilities.
Which is unfortunate if you ask me.
Quote:Less power (as stated by the fact sheet if you bothered to read it) than they have over mobile phones, and other utilities.
Yeah I read that, and the power they have over other utilities would be very concerning. You essentially have no privacy or rights when it comes to your phone, the NSA can and does record, monitor and filter content that kind of power over the internet would be very Orwellian. Anything even close to me is a very serious concern.
Quote:you must be really mad about the TPP then.
Absolutely, the Trans-Pacific Partnership is a massive problem boiling.
Quote:Yeah I read that, and the power they have over other utilities would be very concerning. You essentially have no privacy or rights when it comes to your phone, the NSA can and does record, monitor and filter content that kind of power over the internet would be very Orwellian. Anything even close to me is a very serious concern.
The FCC has nothing to do with the NSA though. And the NSA is probably already monitoring our internet in any case.
Quote:The FCC has nothing to do with the NSA though.
I understand that, I'm just saying the power to regulate is what gives the opportunity for other branches of government to one day over-see. Because the airwaves are already regulated by the FCC the government was able to create a situation where it was legal to control the airwaves to the degree we have now.
I'm not saying that IS what's going to happen, I'm saying that's what I fear MIGHT happen, and them holding over 300 pages of regulations in secret concerns me.
Quote:Their are zero similarities. You should probably be more triggered by the right flipping it's wig over this in general. Calling it the obama care of the internet? Come on now. Why are they trying to scare you.... And why is it working?
Derr commin fer our guuuunnss!!!
#donttreadonme
Quote:I understand that, I'm just saying the power to regulate is what gives the opportunity for other branches of government to one day over-see. Because the airwaves are already regulated by the FCC the government was able to create a situation where it was legal to control the airwaves to the degree we have now.
I'm not saying that IS what's going to happen, I'm saying that's what I fear MIGHT happen, and them holding over 300 pages of regulations in secret concerns me.
Again... you should at least try to read one of those government documents. I highly recommend the affordable care act. If you aren't tearing your hair out by the time you finish with the third page (that's NOT table of contents) then congratulations.
In fact here's a bit from the ACA to give you an idea of what government documents tend to be like:
Quote:
) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a CommunityBased
Care Transitions Program under which the Secretary provides
funding to eligible entities that furnish improved care transition
services to high-risk Medicare beneficiaries.
(b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
(1) ELIGIBLE ENTITY.—The term ‘‘eligible entity’’ means the
following:
(A) A subsection (d) hospital (as defined in section
1886(d)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395ww(d)(1)(B))) identified by the Secretary as having a
high readmission rate, such as under section 1886(q) of the
Social Security Act, as added by section 3025.
(B) An appropriate community-based organization that
provides care transition services under this section across
a continuum of care through arrangements with subsection
(d) hospitals (as so defined) to furnish the services described
in subsection ©(2)(B)(i) and whose governing body
includes sufficient representation of multiple health care
stakeholders (including consumers).
(2) HIGH-RISK MEDICARE BENEFICIARY.—The term ‘‘highrisk
Medicare beneficiary’’ means a Medicare beneficiary who
has attained a minimum hierarchical condition category score,
as determined by the Secretary, based on a diagnosis of multiple
chronic conditions or other risk factors associated with a
hospital readmission or substandard transition into post-hospitalization
care, which may include 1 or more of the following:
(A) Cognitive impairment.
VerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:03 Jun 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00333 Fmt 9001 Sfmt 6601 F:\P11\NHI\COMP\PPACACON.005 HOLCPC
June 9, 2010
Quote:I understand that, I'm just saying the power to regulate is what gives the opportunity for other branches of government to one day over-see. Because the airwaves are already regulated by the FCC the government was able to create a situation where it was legal to control the airwaves to the degree we have now.
I'm not saying that IS what's going to happen, I'm saying that's what I fear MIGHT happen, and them holding over 300 pages of regulations in secret concerns me.
Your fear is very much understandable and is not at all unfounded. Everyone should be furious about the spying in a totally bipartisan way. That is, however is a completely separate issue from Net Neutrality. They can, will and have been spying on the internet and all other types of data for a long time now. They don't need the FFC classification to aid in that what so ever. It's a red herring just like this causing taxes and what not.
Again ask yourself who is screaming about this and why they are screaming and what they have to gain.
FYI: The Netherlands has had net neutrality for years and our internet is far from crippled or any other terms big business likes to use to scare people. In fact, almost everyone in the country has access to faster, cheaper, and more reliable internet than the US.
I am curious how these new regulation will effect outliers like myself with satellite internet as our only option.