FCC Chief Says Title II Is the Way Forward for Net Neutrality
This will ensure the caps are properly measured (no more of this ghost data crap), plans are fairly priced (see what some people are paying for data? it's ludicrous).
In this day and age the internet is parallel to our success as a nation and letting something that's that important be self-regulated and privatized will only hurt us
Contrary to what your state sponsored socialist propaganda has taught you, there is nothing public about the internet. I know the Fed has programmed you into thinking that it owns everything but it doesn't. This is nothing more than theft.
If you really think the FCC is going to fix your so-called "ghost data" problem, you are in for a rude awakening.
Not only is your statement completely false on its face, governments have repeatedly shown that they have no business running anything and are almost always completely incapable of solving problems.
By the way, plans ARE fairly priced. Its called competition for a reason. All the carriers are competing.
"Parallel to the success of our nation".
2nd..."Government spectrum"? What a joke. So because government claims to own naturally occurring frequencies it did not create, companies are beholden to this make believe scam? Don't think so.
3rd... The networks are "subsidized" because the government wants that device in your hand. Farms are subsidized too, so I guess the government owns those farms now? Oh woops...there goes your weak theory.
If you love to be owned and controlled so much, head on down to Cuba. I think I will stay here and fight the government teet suckers.
Again, I can only think 15 year old girls addicted to facebook would claim internet is necessary for national success.
Let's be clear, there is NO RIGHT TO INTERNET SERVICE.
I do not now nor have I ever worked for a communications company. I dont have to be an employee to know right from wrong and understand government overreach.
As far as the state sponsored propaganda comment...
Its a fact. The Federal government took over our education system several decades ago. That in of itself is Socialism. We don't even have to go into the propaganda that system spews to know that this is true. Add in the propaganda and lies and we get people like you... A wonderful example of a propagandized victim. Congr...
You forgot the apostrophe in the word "don't" above. Maybe if you went to the private sector school a few decades ago that never existed instead of a socialist school, you would've known that.
Couldn't come up with a valid argument? Didn't think so. You are not the first person to make a sad, pathetic, feeble attempt to discredit me. Keep trying though. I'm sure you need the practice.
P.S. Did I get my punctuation correct for you? Do you think I give a crap?
Does it not strike you funny that only the carriers seem to be against any regulations imposed by such entity as the government? They make millions on throttling, extra hidden charges, mysterious mistakes, Etc.
Regulations do tend to raise prices and nobody likes price hikes. However, I would rather pay a small amount mo...
You are wrong about "only carriers" disagree with this. Most content providers disagree with it as well. When they have tons of digital content to stream to paying customers, why don't they have the right to pay for a "fatter channel"? Why does any entity have the right, or power in this case, to deny that arrangement between consenting participants?
You cannot even make the argument that "smaller companies can't compete". That isnt true. A smaller provider wouldn't need it. If they do need it, then they can afford it or look for investors who agree that they need it.
This isn't about a false moral right of all to have equal internet access because of...
Best line I have read all day.
Goes well with "middle-class tax break"
The market is a great example of how the consolidation of wireless carriers is putting the strap on consumers and these content prov...
Let's assume everything you are saying is true...
Why do you or anyone else think you have the right or power to force altruistic behaviors on others? If the Fed thinks there should be wireless internet for everyone then they should probably build their own friggin network instead if trying to swoop in and hijack someone else's hard work and cap...
First we have to pass the bill, then we can find out what is in the bill.
For you to say that "wireless carriers control us" is a negative statement on yourself not any wireless carrier. These people are not serving heroine.
This is starting to resemble the movie Idiocracy.
This forum is closed.