Those arguing for net neutrality should not do it based on the idea that it's an essential commodity. I think the best way to win this argument is around  how ISPs often hold monopolies.

That's personally how I see it. I wont support the repeal of net neutrality unless the monopolies go away.

If the monopolies were broken up and real competition entered the marketplace, net neutrality would take care of itself without government intervention.

Unfortunately, no one in the federal government seems interested in legislation to break those monopolies, just in issuing rules that protect and enhance those monopolies.

---

Really? Try and post here without the internet. Try to do your job without the internet. Try to get a job without the internet. Try getting a credit card without the internet, finding a house or apartment, buying a car, paying your bills, managing your bank account, getting a bank account, the list goes on.

Possible? Sure, mostly. Getting a job without access to the internet is all but impossible, and the overwhelming majority of jobs, require internet access. But having access to the internet limited or restricted puts you at an unfair disadvantage, and in many ways will make modern life just this side of impossible. The internet is a necessity and a public utility in 2017, and it shouldn't be throttled or restricted any more than the water company should tell you that [BLEEP] in your guest bathroom toilet will cost an additional $9.99 per month.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

I know people that live without the internet dude.
Work without internet.
Credit cards are not necessities. Get a bank account by going to the bank. Manage a bank account with a check book. Pay your bills by going down to the utility or sending a check in the mail.
Get a job by getting off your [BLEEP] and hussle through some applications and handing out resumes. (Employers actually love the initiative shown by people willing to go in and try to get a job)
OMG what a terrible life to have to do some leg work without the internet.

It's only essential to life to those who have lived their whole lives inside the damn computer.
Get out in the world, it exists beyond your screen kid.

Bunch of sissies in today's world... makes me sick.
If your government can't control these corporations with net neutrality, why is it needed?
If they've been limiting your net searches already, what are you afraid of?

Oh... that's right, everything must be over regulated... because regulation works soooo well.

I take it you havent had to get a job recently. As someone who was raised to do all the things you said about going in person and handing out resumes, I can assure you that will not work in most big companies anymore.

I personally still do it for just the reasons you said, but if its not a small business I still get the 'apply online' line even if they like me. I am in healthcare for referance.

Ten years ago I got job offers doing that and I believe it helps still, but no place I have worked at recently has even had an offline app to fill out. Some level of internet is a necessity for most people especially with every job requiring 'checking email' now.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

Those arguing for net neutrality should not do it based on the idea that it's an essential commodity. I think the best way to win this argument is around  how ISPs often hold monopolies.

Some people have made this argument, but it always seems to return to end-of-the-world scenarios and labeling the internet as important as water. A lot people don't agree with that. Everyone knows they don't have options when it comes to ISPs. Use that aspect and tell them that they now hold even more power.

That's personally how I see it. I wont support the repeal of net neutrality unless the monopolies go away.

I do agree with this, the internet is not as important as water, but it is necessary in most non rural areas now.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

Read through this graphic. If you remain convinced that the end of net neutrality in a situation with government-sanctioned monopolies is a good thing, then I give up. This is the most real-world analogy I've seen:





I'll also leave this here. It comes from a person I trust completely who works for a major internet provider in a position to know about such things. It goes like this: said major ISP is drawing up plans to introduce a "streaming package" and is actively seeking "partners" amongst major streaming services to be included in that package. The conversation about PR has centered around how to make it look like an "enhancement" to existing plans, even though the current working version has no decrease in anyone's bill, just an increase to those who wish to use streaming content.

So once, "Hey, look, we're speeding up your internet!" becomes, "Now we're going to charge you a whole lot more to do anything that benefits from that speed!", remember the day that a bought and paid for Verizon lawyer who weaseled his way into control of the FCC put a rule into effect that allows Verizon to act like the monopoly it is and leave its subscribers no recourse for those actions.

---

Just checking to see if everyone made it through this net neutrality thing alive and well?

---

Read through this graphic. If you remain convinced that the end of net neutrality in a situation with government-sanctioned monopolies is a good thing, then I give up. This is the most real-world analogy I've seen:





I'll also leave this here. It comes from a person I trust completely who works for a major internet provider in a position to know about such things. It goes like this: said major ISP is drawing up plans to introduce a "streaming package" and is actively seeking "partners" amongst major streaming services to be included in that package. The conversation about PR has centered around how to make it look like an "enhancement" to existing plans, even though the current working version has no decrease in anyone's bill, just an increase to those who wish to use streaming content.

So once, "Hey, look, we're speeding up your internet!" becomes, "Now we're going to charge you a whole lot more to do anything that benefits from that speed!", remember the day that a bought and paid for Verizon lawyer who weaseled his way into control of the FCC put a rule into effect that allows Verizon to act like the monopoly it is and leave its subscribers no recourse for those actions.

Interesting that a vegan CEO won't sell cheese for the hamburgers he does sell.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Read through this graphic. If you remain convinced that the end of net neutrality in a situation with government-sanctioned monopolies is a good thing, then I give up. This is the most real-world analogy I've seen:





I'll also leave this here. It comes from a person I trust completely who works for a major internet provider in a position to know about such things. It goes like this: said major ISP is drawing up plans to introduce a "streaming package" and is actively seeking "partners" amongst major streaming services to be included in that package. The conversation about PR has centered around how to make it look like an "enhancement" to existing plans, even though the current working version has no decrease in anyone's bill, just an increase to those who wish to use streaming content.

So once, "Hey, look, we're speeding up your internet!" becomes, "Now we're going to charge you a whole lot more to do anything that benefits from that speed!", remember the day that a bought and paid for Verizon lawyer who weaseled his way into control of the FCC put a rule into effect that allows Verizon to act like the monopoly it is and leave its subscribers no recourse for those actions.

Interesting that a vegan CEO won't sell cheese for the hamburgers he does sell.

---

Just checking to see if everyone made it through this net neutrality thing alive and well?

It's been less than two weeks. The Internet won't be deconstructed in a day.

---

I didn't miss the point, the creator missed some logic, that's all.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I didn't miss the point, the creator missed some logic, that's all.

Ok, J-Dub

---

Just to if made through net thing and ?

My ISP only allows every other word through.

---

Just to if made through net thing and ?

My ISP only allows every other word through.

Same here. I went to bing.com and it redirected me to google. Not sure what is going on. Our pets heads are falling off!

---

I didn't miss the point, the creator missed some logic, that's all.

Ok, J-Dub

Wow you take this personally. Maybe you should take some time, step away, get an oil change.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Ok, J-Dub

Wow you take this personally. Maybe you should take some time, step away, get an oil change.

Bite your lip. Net Neutrality is a matter of life and death. A liberal told me so last week.

---

Read through this graphic. If you remain convinced that the end of net neutrality in a situation with government-sanctioned monopolies is a good thing, then I give up. This is the most real-world analogy I've seen:





I'll also leave this here. It comes from a person I trust completely who works for a major internet provider in a position to know about such things. It goes like this: said major ISP is drawing up plans to introduce a "streaming package" and is actively seeking "partners" amongst major streaming services to be included in that package. The conversation about PR has centered around how to make it look like an "enhancement" to existing plans, even though the current working version has no decrease in anyone's bill, just an increase to those who wish to use streaming content.

So once, "Hey, look, we're speeding up your internet!" becomes, "Now we're going to charge you a whole lot more to do anything that benefits from that speed!", remember the day that a bought and paid for Verizon lawyer who weaseled his way into control of the FCC put a rule into effect that allows Verizon to act like the monopoly it is and leave its subscribers no recourse for those actions.

Interesting that a vegan CEO won't sell cheese for the hamburgers he does sell.

You win the internet today.  

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Read through this graphic. If you remain convinced that the end of net neutrality in a situation with government-sanctioned monopolies is a good thing, then I give up. This is the most real-world analogy I've seen:





I'll also leave this here. It comes from a person I trust completely who works for a major internet provider in a position to know about such things. It goes like this: said major ISP is drawing up plans to introduce a "streaming package" and is actively seeking "partners" amongst major streaming services to be included in that package. The conversation about PR has centered around how to make it look like an "enhancement" to existing plans, even though the current working version has no decrease in anyone's bill, just an increase to those who wish to use streaming content.

So once, "Hey, look, we're speeding up your internet!" becomes, "Now we're going to charge you a whole lot more to do anything that benefits from that speed!", remember the day that a bought and paid for Verizon lawyer who weaseled his way into control of the FCC put a rule into effect that allows Verizon to act like the monopoly it is and leave its subscribers no recourse for those actions.

Interesting that a vegan CEO won't sell cheese for the hamburgers he does sell.

I agree, but knowing a particular vegan friend of mine, she does indeed go more nuclear over dairy than meat (maybe cause it is hidden in more stuff?) I have a hard time eating with her even tho I am a vegitarian.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

Just checking to see if everyone made it through this net neutrality thing alive and well?

You do realize Congress still has to vote on this? And even if they do pass it the world as we know it won't come crumbling down over night. Give it a couple months at least.

Cheers.

---

Ugh.

We are not weak Europeans.

The Citizenry of the United States wouldn't tolerate an ISP doing any of these things..

Free market is a beautiful thing to behold. It will correct itself, it always does.

---

Ugh.

We are not weak Europeans.

The Citizenry of the United States wouldn't tolerate an ISP doing any of these things..

Free market is a beautiful thing to behold. It will correct itself, it always does.

you got me, I haven't laughed that hard in awhile.

---

Ugh.

We are not weak Europeans.

The Citizenry of the United States wouldn't tolerate an ISP doing any of these things..

Free market is a beautiful thing to behold. It will correct itself, it always does.

Do you listen to yourself talk, or do you just kind of keep your mouth hanging open and see what falls out?

---

Read through this graphic. If you remain convinced that the end of net neutrality in a situation with government-sanctioned monopolies is a good thing, then I give up. This is the most real-world analogy I've seen:





I'll also leave this here. It comes from a person I trust completely who works for a major internet provider in a position to know about such things. It goes like this: said major ISP is drawing up plans to introduce a "streaming package" and is actively seeking "partners" amongst major streaming services to be included in that package. The conversation about PR has centered around how to make it look like an "enhancement" to existing plans, even though the current working version has no decrease in anyone's bill, just an increase to those who wish to use streaming content.

So once, "Hey, look, we're speeding up your internet!" becomes, "Now we're going to charge you a whole lot more to do anything that benefits from that speed!", remember the day that a bought and paid for Verizon lawyer who weaseled his way into control of the FCC put a rule into effect that allows Verizon to act like the monopoly it is and leave its subscribers no recourse for those actions.

Interesting that a vegan CEO won't sell cheese for the hamburgers he does sell.

This would be applicable if it cost 2.99 to lay a mile of fiber optic high speed access.  I had a 124k access line in rural Missouri for 2 years and it sucked but no one was building fiber out to my house for the 100 people around me.  Government control of anything is a bad idea.

Do you like the DMV?  Paying taxes and then holding out your hand for a "tax return" yearly?  Everyone gets so excited when the government gives you back your money.  That's alright keep blaming big business on this stuff.  Big business helped write the "net neutrality" rules.  My company has stopped investing in the US because of the rules.  I know yeah but it is an evil ISP.  Yeah the one that has 200k employees and a large union force that has been getting killed by making high price items commodities. 

http://www.insidesources.com/investment-...mist-says/

Anyone have a problem with Google manipulating search results when you look for net neutrality counterpoints?  I do my best to not use their products and services.  They spy on you more than the US Government and have no problem belittling people that disagree with them.

https://patriotpost.us/articles/53348

Google do no evil.  sham

---

The Khan Years

Patience, Persistence, and Piss Poor General Managers.