Obama says FCC should reclassify internet as a utility

[GourmetDan]

I agree with the other posters who stated that this represents just another thing the government wants under their control. They see something working and prospering without them, and they cannot stand it. They are obsessive in their craving to control everything, every single thing, about everyone's life. And this is part of that. IMO.

There is a reason government insists that everything be under their control, and I don't think it's 'jealousy'.

The internet is a direct threat to governments worldwide because it is a communication-medium where they cannot effectively control the content.  It 'leaks' into places that governments don't want it to leak.

Just like the printing press, typewriters and copy-machines used to...

[240B]

There is a reason government insists that everything be under their control, and I don't think it's 'jealousy'.

The internet is a direct threat to governments worldwide because it is a communication-medium where they cannot effectively control the content.  It 'leaks' into places that governments don't want it to leak.

Just like the printing press, typewriters and copy-machines used to...

Yep GD, you are elevated and correct in your writings. There was a time in several countries where you could be executed for just owning a printing press.
 
It is funny, isn't it? How the modern day intersects with the 1500's. As we struggle to progress as a society, the government stays the same as it always was. "Control" and "Power" drive men to madness. The American people are very unique worldwide. Unlike most people everywhere in the world, controlling Americans is like trying to herd cats. They simply do not put up with it, as Obama is finding out the hard way.
 
There is a Jewish prayer that says "Thank you oh Lord almighty who has not made me a woman." (shee lo assani eisha) I have to thank the Lord for making me not care about what other people are doing, or not doing. I have to thank the Lord that I do not have this pernicious compulsion for control and power.
 
As an easy going guy, I have a kind of freedom those on the Left will never understand. I deal with the issues as they arise and are needed to be addressed. I do not try to predict and control what people will or will not do. I prefer to see, to let them do it, and then deal with it. But that's just me.

[mystery-ak]

http://www.newsmax.com/PrintTemplate.aspx/?nodeid=606460


Newsmax
Ted Cruz: Net Neutrality Plan Is 'Obamacare for the Internet'
Monday, November 10, 2014 03:55 PM

By: Joel Himelfarb

Sen. Ted Cruz blasted President Obama Monday over his support for “net neutrality,” a concept the Texas Republican termed “the biggest regulatory threat to the Internet” right now, according to the Daily Caller.

Earlier Monday, Obama said he backed net neutrality and suggested that the Federal Communications Commission closely regulate the Internet, treating it as a public utility similar to telephone service. The president said  federal regulation is necessary to ensure that Internet service providers cannot “pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas.”

Critics say that net neutrality would transfer from private service providers to government regulators at the FCC authority to decide Internet service speeds and consumer prices, and even political content, reported Forbes.
 
Cruz wrote on Facebook that the regulatory apparatus necessary to enforce net neutrality would stifle innovation and growth.

“In short, net neutrality is Obamacare for the Internet. It puts the government in charge of determining Internet pricing, terms of service, and what types of products and services can be delivered, leading to fewer choices, fewer opportunities, and higher prices for consumers,” Cruz said.

“The Internet should not operate at the speed of government,” he added.

Other deregulation advocates warned that Obama’s approach could encourage repressive regimes to assert more control over the Internet within their borders.

Obama’s position “discredits U.S. efforts to prevent countries like Russia and China from destroying the current international multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance and replacing it with government regulatory control, “ former  Sen. John Sununu and former Rep. Harold Ford Jr., honorary co-chairs of Broadband for America, said in a statement on Monday.

“It is ironic that the president made his announcement while in China, which has long sought greater government control over the Internet and surely will be encouraged by the president’s statement,” they added.

Sununu was a Republican senator from New Hampshire. Ford was a Democrat congressman from Tennessee.

[Luis Gonzalez]

There are two things that progressives acknowledge work against their favor in our culture:

1. Talk radio
2. Conservative bloggers and forums.

They've tried to bring them under control by putting a big Federal heel on both their throats.

The talk radio proposal was called "The Fairness Doctrine", this one is called "Net Neutrality". 

In "Atlas Shrugged", every new act of government futility and stupidity carried with it a benevolent-sounding title.

And here we are.

[240B]

Absolutely true. If you ever hear a group called, "The Americans for Americans who love America", you can bet your last dollar this is going to be a far Left, possibly Muslim, organization with the goal of destroying America as it has always been.

[aligncare]

As far as I can see there's nothing to stop ISPs from jacking up prices. Because one, they know it's a pain in the neck to switch companies and two, the other mega company charges the same price anyway.

Example. I recently called Verizon customer service to change my method of payment for Internet service. I don't have TV or phone, just Internet. The guy practically hounded me to pay "just a little more" for a faster download speed, and to sign up for phone and TV service.

To me, it's sort of like the car salesman who quotes you a price and then says "oh, you wanted tires with that car?"

Another thing. When I did have television years ago, I had to pay for dozens of channels I never wanted nor watched. If they really cared about customer service and satisfaction they'd have menu pricing.

[massadvj]

I think you guys are being a bit paranoid about net neutrality.  At this point the issue has nothing to do with content and everything to do with what ISP's can do in terms of charging for access.  Yes, it does (as supported by OPapaDoc) mean more regulation.  But net neutrality in and of itself does not necessarily require that the internet be treated as a utility.  Net neutrality is the law right now.  It stays so long as no one does anything.

[GourmetDan]

But net neutrality in and of itself does not necessarily require that the internet be treated as a utility.

Obama says FCC should reclassify internet as a utility

Ain't semantics and parsing words fun?

[massadvj]

Ain't semantics and parsing words fun?

That's what OPapaDoc does.  He is basically raising a red herring of the mean Republicans wanting to get rid of net neutrality, and using that to justify greater federal oversight of the internet.  But the GOP is not necessarily opposed to net neutrality.  Yes, the big ISP's don't like it, but the big sites like eBay, Amazon and Netflix love net neutrality, and the hundreds of thousands of small eBay and Amazon dealers like it as well.  Whenever the issue comes up, congress gets millions of e-mails and then members from both sides of the aisle quietly put the matter to bed.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I think you guys are being a bit paranoid about net neutrality.  At this point the issue has nothing to do with content and everything to do with what ISP's can do in terms of charging for access.  Yes, it does (as supported by OPapaDoc) mean more regulation.  But net neutrality in and of itself does not necessarily require that the internet be treated as a utility.  Net neutrality is the law right now.  It stays so long as no one does anything.

Yes.

At this point it has nothing to do with content.

In Atlas Shrugged, Dagny Taggart's vision of expanding his railroad business via a FedEx-like rail service is cajoled, badgered and regulated into bankruptcy always in the name of "the people" and "public service".

Sounds far fetched?

In 2009 American rail shippers asked Congress to regulate rates, in the name of fairness.

And here we are.

[aligncare]

"Oh, you wanted tires with that car?"

Maybe that's why I keep getting the rotating circle on Netflix; I'm not paying for a faster download speed.

[GourmetDan]

Whenever the issue comes up, congress gets millions of e-mails and then members from both sides of the aisle quietly put the matter to bed.

Didn't somebody write a book about how Con-gress extorts money from various groups by threatening their interests with legislation and then backing off when the money comes rolling in?

[GourmetDan]

In 2009 American rail shippers asked Congress to regulate rates, in the name of fairness.

Regulated industries generally have a 'don't throw me in the briar patch' mentality because profits are regulated (read guaranteed) as well...

[raml]

Anything and I do mean anything the government regulates costs us consumers money always always and we do not get better service. Why don't people see this the government has made a real mess of this country and we allow it by thinking they should regulate and that in the end it will get us fairness. Anyone who thinks that must be sleep walking you just have to look around to see what government regulations have done to this once great country. I don't trust them at all for any type of regulating we need freedom not fairness of the governmental type

[massadvj]

Didn't somebody write a book about how Con-gress extorts money from various groups by threatening their interests with legislation and then backing off when the money comes rolling in?

I think I read somewhere that no wallet is safe so long as congress is in session.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Oh, you wanted tires with that car?"

Maybe that's why I keep getting the rotating circle on Netflix; I'm not paying for a faster download speed.

I want to sponsor The Ribeye Fairness Act of 2014.

I like Prime grade ribeyes, but at best I can afford choice. I don't see why people should be able to eat Prime ribeye steaks simply because they can afford them when we the people can't. I don't see how it's fair that only rich people should be able to afford them regularly.

The poor, when they can afford a nice ribeye at all, are forced to eat Select grade steaks.

My Ribeye Fairness Act will promote steak equality all across the nation and guarantee everyone an ungraded, commercial ribeye steak dinner at equally affordable prices.

[GourmetDan]

Why don't people see this the government has made a real mess of this country and we allow it by thinking they should regulate and that in the end it will get us fairness.

Mostly because they put a cutesy name on things like 'fairness' and 'affordable' and LIVs think they want some of that...   

[aligncare]

Apples and oranges, Luis. We don't live in the dial-up Internet world anymore.

You do want tires with that car, don't you?

http://www.wired.com/2014/06/net_neutrality_missing/

[Dexter]

I want to sponsor The Ribeye Fairness Act of 2014.

I like Prime grade ribeyes, but at best I can afford choice. I don't see why people should be able to eat Prime ribeye steaks simply because they can afford them when we the people can't. I don't see how it's fair that only rich people should be able to afford them regularly.

The poor, when they can afford a nice ribeye at all, are forced to eat Select grade steaks.

My Ribeye Fairness Act will promote steak equality all across the nation and guarantee everyone an ungraded, commercial ribeye steak dinner at equally affordable prices.

There is nothing special about the higher internet speeds. It's not like the ISPs pay more money for the better internet lanes to give to the highest paying customers. They could and should be providing that service to everybody that pays for internet from them. Trying to take control of the internet and set up a tiered system that gives precedence to people who pay them more money is nothing but an unnecessary money/control grab. It wouldn't even be that bad if it was possible for people to be competitive with them, but they have such a monopoly that they have managed to keep competition like Google fiber out of entire regions. These guys are a perfect example of why monopolies are terrible.

[aligncare]

Thanks for fleshing out the argument, Dex. There's no competition out there and that always leads to higher prices.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Apples and oranges, Luis. We don't live in the dial-up Internet world anymore.

You do want tires with that car, don't you?

http://www.wired.com/2014/06/net_neutrality_missing/

Apples and oranges.

All cars are sold with tires.

You can get better tires (and all sorts of other goodies) if you can afford them.

[aligncare]

Cable companies have a lock on an area. There's no competition out there.

[Luis Gonzalez]

You do realize that the net-net results of this will be that everyone will get slow speed.

 

[Luis Gonzalez]

Cable companies have a lock on an area. There's no competition out there.

Then address that without expanding government.

[aligncare]

Check out that story on wired.com

They agree with you. More competition is needed.