Liberals hate this because it promotes freedom. The left loves to be told what to do.

Hey hoss, I don't know if you ran to the stadium to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and got lost on the way home or something, but I'm still waiting for you to explain to me how the concept of net neutrality runs counter to freedom. You still out there? O say, I can't see you.

Will NN and FCC regulations, barrier to entry is so high for entrepreneurs you can't have local, fresh competition try to compete to lower prices or improve services. This is enough to want you not to want NN alone, why would you not want competitors to come in and make internet cheaper, while improving it? There are countries overseas with no FCC or NN with triple play plans(TV, Phone, net) with 100 mbs down, adjusted for USD for about 13$ a month. I pay 75$ just for internet currently. Less government means we all can win, more government ends in a zero sum game. Governments have no incentive to make you happy, or have any accountability on failed promises, lies, etc.  At least these companies do have incentive, and know you can participate or leave voluntarily with whoever you like. The government does not work this way, it is an entity based on using force.

---

Is it me or do streamers seem to be the main proponent for NN? I am an infrequent streamer so I guess that is why the subject doesn’t garner much on my interest.

---

Hey hoss, I don't know if you ran to the stadium to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and got lost on the way home or something, but I'm still waiting for you to explain to me how the concept of net neutrality runs counter to freedom. You still out there? O say, I can't see you.

Will NN and FCC regulations, barrier to entry is so high for entrepreneurs you can't have local, fresh competition try to compete to lower prices or improve services. This is enough to want you not to want NN alone, why would you not want competitors to come in and make internet cheaper, while improving it? There are countries overseas with no FCC or NN with triple play plans(TV, Phone, net) with 100 mbs down, adjusted for USD for about 13$ a month. I pay 75$ just for internet currently. Less government means we all can win, more government ends in a zero sum game. Governments have no incentive to make you happy, or have any accountability on failed promises, lies, etc.  At least these companies do have incentive, and know you can participate or leave voluntarily with whoever you like. The government does not work this way, it is an entity based on using force.

What within NN (not talking the FCC because that would be another conversation) itself stifles competition?  
I would also be interested to hear about these countries since most the ones with 100mbs connection more than likely have an FCC like entetity with a NN like rule.

---

Why would it benefit an ISP to provide crappy service to their customers? Netflix reached an agreement with the major ISPs outside of government interference anyways. Do you really want the government to have more control on your internet... you want your internet at the speed of government? The reason we have had faster internet in the USA than Europe is that we've had a pretty loose regulatory environment. 

The sad and unfortunate part of life in 2017 is this bold part. The answer to this question is overwhelmingly yes, for a growing number of people. Damn the facts, or the economics, or the simple fact we are supposed to be a "free" country. Governments can only gain anything by taking from others, they have no money, or goods, or create anything. Yet we are one of the highest regulated and taxed markets in the world, and have become heavily reliant on government as a society. 

NN is only about 2 years in, to think this is some doomsday for the internet is a little naive. Most companies, including ISPs, want happy customers. The ones who don't, or can't satisfy customers enough, usually go under or get bought by more successful companies. Unless of course you're "too big to fail", then you get theft(sorry, tax) dollars and get bailed out to "save the economy". Then you get $15 trillion dollars of debt over the last 2 administrations, taxed and printed into existence, with hundreds of trillions in unfunded liabilities our government has already promised that they have no way to pay for. But, the majority of citizens ignore that for whatever reason. Just provide more government, regulations, taxes and more spending. I think getting government OUT of more and more things, is the way to go.

Generally I would agree...Less government involvement would be much better if companies would police themselves and provide a quality product for a reasonable price...

What I do not want to see is ISPs who decide to start offering internet packages like this (keep in mind this is just a for example only and not indicative of what may or may not happen scenario)... BillyBob.com  internet packages Email only with 10 attachments under "X" KB/MB per month for $19.99. Premiere package with unlimited email, attachments, ( plus video and audio) for $25 per month...Silver package 20MB including unlimited email and attachments and web surfing/downloads for $39.99 per month, Gold package includes the silver package plus 20 MB of streaming, Platinum package is unlimited streaming for any internet usage for $65.99 per month...

I feel like the ISPs will start offering packages as above not to mention entertainment packages for watching things like movies videos sports et.al Cable ISPs already do that, to a certain degree especially sports packages and I think ISPs would love to maximize revenue by doing the same thing if they were allowed to do so, so in this case, I would like to see government regulation

---

The sad and unfortunate part of life in 2017 is this bold part. The answer to this question is overwhelmingly yes, for a growing number of people. Damn the facts, or the economics, or the simple fact we are supposed to be a "free" country. Governments can only gain anything by taking from others, they have no money, or goods, or create anything. Yet we are one of the highest regulated and taxed markets in the world, and have become heavily reliant on government as a society. 

NN is only about 2 years in, to think this is some doomsday for the internet is a little naive. Most companies, including ISPs, want happy customers. The ones who don't, or can't satisfy customers enough, usually go under or get bought by more successful companies. Unless of course you're "too big to fail", then you get theft(sorry, tax) dollars and get bailed out to "save the economy". Then you get $15 trillion dollars of debt over the last 2 administrations, taxed and printed into existence, with hundreds of trillions in unfunded liabilities our government has already promised that they have no way to pay for. But, the majority of citizens ignore that for whatever reason. Just provide more government, regulations, taxes and more spending. I think getting government OUT of more and more things, is the way to go.

Generally I would agree...Less government involvement would be much better if companies would police themselves and provide a quality product for a reasonable price...

What I do not want to see is ISPs who decide to start offering internet packages like this (keep in mind this is just a for example only and not indicative of what may or may not happen scenario)... BillyBob.com  internet packages Email only with 10 attachments under "X" KB/MB per month for $19.99. Premiere package with unlimited email, attachments, ( plus video and audio) for $25 per month...Silver package 20MB including unlimited email and attachments and web surfing/downloads for $39.99 per month, Gold package includes the silver package plus 20 MB of streaming, Platinum package is unlimited streaming for any internet usage for $65.99 per month...

I feel like the ISPs will start offering packages as above not to mention entertainment packages for watching things like movies videos sports et.al Cable ISPs already do that, to a certain degree especially sports packages and I think ISPs would love to maximize revenue by doing the same thing if they were allowed to do so, so in this case, I would like to see government regulation

Well get ready to be highly disappointed.

---

Hey hoss, I don't know if you ran to the stadium to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and got lost on the way home or something, but I'm still waiting for you to explain to me how the concept of net neutrality runs counter to freedom. You still out there? O say, I can't see you.

Will NN and FCC regulations, barrier to entry is so high for entrepreneurs you can't have local, fresh competition try to compete to lower prices or improve services. This is enough to want you not to want NN alone, why would you not want competitors to come in and make internet cheaper, while improving it? There are countries overseas with no FCC or NN with triple play plans(TV, Phone, net) with 100 mbs down, adjusted for USD for about 13$ a month. I pay 75$ just for internet currently. Less government means we all can win, more government ends in a zero sum game. Governments have no incentive to make you happy, or have any accountability on failed promises, lies, etc.  At least these companies do have incentive, and know you can participate or leave voluntarily with whoever you like. The government does not work this way, it is an entity based on using force.

By your logic, removing net neutrality provisions allows for new entrants to the business that will come in and compete, giving consumers more choices in internet providers.

Why on God's green earth would the big ISPs be sinking millions of dollars into lobbying for that?

---

Sitting here watching Monday Night Football in standard definition on DirecTV Now with Comcast as my ISP wondering if it’s just coincidence or if I’m being throttled for using a competitor’s streaming service. I’ve hardly ever had a problem with getting broadcasts in high def.

---

Sitting here watching Monday Night Football in standard definition on DirecTV Now with Comcast as my ISP wondering if it’s just coincidence or if I’m being throttled for using a competitor’s streaming service.  I’ve hardly ever had a problem with getting broadcasts in high def.

The rule hasn't gone into effect yet, and even if/when it does, it's going to take more than a few days to implement paid prioritization. It's just your connection.

---

Lots of ignorance in this thread.

Net Neutrality is just another way to make the idiot sheep (left) think the Government is doing something.

2015 is when it started.. so from 1991 to 2015 it was the FREE MARKET (that thing the left hates) that guided the internet.. and guess what? If we, the people, don't like what a company is doing, then we, the people, will stop using them. Period.

Net Neutrality was BS when it started and it's just a bigger more useless pile of BS now.

---

Lots of ignorance in this thread.

Net Neutrality is just another way to make the idiot sheep (left) think the Government is doing something.

2015 is when it started.. so from 1991 to 2015 it was the FREE MARKET (that thing the left hates) that guided the internet.. and guess what? If we, the people, don't like what a company is doing, then we, the people, will stop using them. Period.

Net Neutrality was BS when it started and it's just a bigger more useless pile of BS now.

So let's just stomp this notion to the ground:

Prior to about 2010 net neutrailty was the de facto status of the internet not because of free market or any other outdated notion but because ISPs simply did not have the tech required to monitor the data going trough their networks. Somewhere between 2010 and 2015 this tech did become available and the ISPs start using it to reduce the bandwidth available to services like Netflix. If you're wondering why Netflix specifically; it's because the ISPs are often also the only providers of cable TV in an area and Netflix is a direct competitor of cable TV. If you're slow to keep up, I spell it out directly for you: ISPs like Comcast were intentionally abusing their monopoly position on broadband internet to hinder the operation of a direct competitor. 

The FCC tried to stop this practice but the ISPs argued in court that the FCC had no authority because they weren't considered Title II providers. The ISPs won this case so in response the FCC, with support from the executive branch and the federal government, declared ISPs to be Title II providers thus giving the FCC the authority to enforce net neutrality and stop the type of abusive practices of the years previous.

Net neutrality existed long before the 2015 change came into effect. The only thing that changed in 2015 was that the appropriate government agencies the ability to properly monitor and correct the ISPs to enforce free and equal access to the internet for all. With the current removal of this oversight that power has now returned to the ISPs which means your ability to access the internet at your discretion is now at the mercy of [BLEEP] Comcast and their ilk.

---

Lots of ignorance in this thread.

Net Neutrality is just another way to make the idiot sheep (left) think the Government is doing something.

2015 is when it started.. so from 1991 to 2015 it was the FREE MARKET (that thing the left hates) that guided the internet.. and guess what? If we, the people, don't like what a company is doing, then we, the people, will stop using them. Period.

Net Neutrality was BS when it started and it's just a bigger more useless pile of BS now.

So let's just stomp this notion to the ground:

Prior to about 2010 net neutrailty was the de facto status of the internet not because of free market or any other outdated notion but because ISPs simply did not have the tech required to monitor the data going trough their networks. Somewhere between 2010 and 2015 this tech did become available and the ISPs start using it to reduce the bandwidth available to services like Netflix. If you're wondering why Netflix specifically; it's because the ISPs are often also the only providers of cable TV in an area and Netflix is a direct competitor of cable TV. If you're slow to keep up, I spell it out directly for you: ISPs like Comcast were intentionally abusing their monopoly position on broadband internet to hinder the operation of a direct competitor. 

The FCC tried to stop this practice but the ISPs argued in court that the FCC had no authority because they weren't considered Title II providers. The ISPs won this case so in response the FCC, with support from the executive branch and the federal government, declared ISPs to be Title II providers thus giving the FCC the authority to enforce net neutrality and stop the type of abusive practices of the years previous.

Net neutrality existed long before the 2015 change came into effect. The only thing that changed in 2015 was that the appropriate government agencies the ability to properly monitor and correct the ISPs to enforce free and equal access to the internet for all. With the current removal of this oversight that power has now returned to the ISPs which means your ability to access the internet at your discretion is now at the mercy of [BLEEP] Comcast and their ilk.

Well said.

---

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2017/12...eutrality/

---

It is not the government's job to pick winners and losers. I always side w/ the free market.

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

It is not the government's job to pick winners and losers. I always side w/ the free market.

Net Neutrality enforces the free market by preventing ISPs from abusing their position of power over not only consumers but also other companies like Google and Netflix.

---

Amazing how the people against net neutrality don't actually know what it is or does..

---

Amazing how the people against net neutrality don't actually know what it is or does..

Kinda what I’ve been thinking perusing this thread as well. 

That or have it 180 degrees backwards.

---

Sitting here watching Monday Night Football in standard definition on DirecTV Now with Comcast as my ISP wondering if it’s just coincidence or if I’m being throttled for using a competitor’s streaming service.  I’ve hardly ever had a problem with getting broadcasts in high def.

Definitely coincidence lol
I have Cox cable internet... my HD goes in and out all the time and I have the 2nd highest internet plan.

---

It is not the government's job to pick winners and losers. I always side w/ the free market.

Net Neutrality enforces the free market by preventing ISPs from abusing their position of power over not only consumers but also other companies like Google and Netflix.

There are 2688 different ISPs in the US.
I really don't think we're gonna see an issue where they risk $ by limiting people's streaming, speed, or access. It's too easy to find someone else to go with.
In my area alone I think there are easily 3 or 4 different options.

---

Sitting here watching Monday Night Football in standard definition on DirecTV Now with Comcast as my ISP wondering if it’s just coincidence or if I’m being throttled for using a competitor’s streaming service.  I’ve hardly ever had a problem with getting broadcasts in high def.

Definitely coincidence lol
I have Cox cable internet... my HD goes in and out all the time and I have the 2nd highest internet plan.

---

Net Neutrality enforces the free market by preventing ISPs from abusing their position of power over not only consumers but also other companies like Google and Netflix.

There are 2688 different ISPs in the US.
I really don't think we're gonna see an issue where they risk $ by limiting people's streaming, speed, or access. It's too easy to find someone else to go with.
In my area alone I think there are easily 3 or 4 different options.

Welp, in my area Comcast recently sent out throttling notices for customers who use more than 250g per month. Guess we all aren't having the same experience.

---

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

Amazing how the people against net neutrality don't actually know what it is or does..

Kinda what I’ve been thinking perusing this thread as well. 

That or have it 180 degrees backwards.

Usually on big changes in law I can see where the other side is coming from, to a degree. Here I just don't know why anyone would want net neutrality gone.

If you did a poll I'd imagine something like 90% of regular internet users would be for net neutrality, if not more.

---

Definitely coincidence lol
I have Cox cable internet... my HD goes in and out all the time and I have the 2nd highest internet plan.

---

There are 2688 different ISPs in the US.
I really don't think we're gonna see an issue where they risk $ by limiting people's streaming, speed, or access. It's too easy to find someone else to go with.
In my area alone I think there are easily 3 or 4 different options.

Welp, in my area Comcast recently sent out throttling notices for customers who use more than 250g per month. Guess we all aren't having the same experience.

We don't get throttled, we just get charged extra at 1TB. I'm cool with that, believe it or not. The internet is a public utility, but I'm billed usage for water and electricity, so data caps make sense as long as they're reasonable. I've actually got a serious problem with throttling, as it's a hidden cap.

Also, Comcast prices out here are stupid. I'd love to have an alternative, but Mediacom doesn't come this far south, and even though they were one of the ISPs defending net neutrality and I'd love to jump to them if possible, their service is slooooooow compared to the 90Gbps I have now.

---