AT&T: Kill Net Neutrality For Cheaper Internet

PensFault said:
It's always nice to see statists getting butt hurt by my comments.

The free market will always be better than any sort of government manipulated (with the smiley face aid of corporations) illusion of a free market. Free markets have built in regulation and just because none of the statists can imagine up such a scenario doesn't make it untrue. Fascism doesn't beget freedom, it actually destroys it. Freedom sucks though, it's too much responsibility, right? ...
Click to expand...

I'll ignore the childish insults in your post and move on.

The reason people look to regulation is because the free market is a work of fiction, there has never been a free market, nor will there ever be one. Here's the trick, a free market would have to be regulated to exist. A truly open free market would be bad for companies, that's why the largest companies quickly seize control of an open market and suppress market change. That instantly destroys a free market, it becomes a self regulated market and the biggest fish swim around gobbling up the little fish. The only way to stop that would be with regulation...

...And then we have the problem with regulation, we know companies can't guarantee their survival in a truly free market so they have to control the market. If the market is regulated by government the corporations have to take control of the government instead, something that they have become very proficient at. It's probably more expensive to have to spend money to control generation after generation of governance but only marginally more than simply buying competition up.

At the end of the day neither system functions as intended. If it exists, it can be manipulated and corrupted.
 
Twisted Kidney said:
I'll ignore the childish insults in your post and move on.

The reason people look to regulation is because the free market is a work of fiction, there has never been a free market, nor will there ever be one. Here's the trick, a free market would have to be regulated to exist. A truly open free market would be bad for companies, that's why the largest companies quickly seize control of an open market and suppress market change. That instantly destroys a free market, it becomes a self regulated market and the biggest fish swim around gobbling up the little fish. The only way to stop that would be with regulation...

...And then we have the problem with regulation, we know companies can't guarantee their survival in a truly free market so they have to control the market. If the market is regulated by government the corporations have to take control of the government instead, something that they have become very proficient at. It's probably more expensive to have to spend money to control generation after generation of governance but only marginally more than simply buying competition up.

At the end of the day neither system functions as intended. If it exists, it can be manipulated and corrupted.
Click to expand...

What you said..
plus as a concept itself 'free' market is an absurdity, the instant there is a player in it, the 'market' is already being influenced/changed, hence not 'free', never 'free' in practice. I guess the only free market is the one that doesn't exist yet.
 
PensFault said:
Net Neutrality = Government Regulation = Bad.

The problem, though, is all the other crap these big companies have gotten into the law books. So it's not even remotely a free market where idiotic practices can be corrected through market forces.
Click to expand...

m'kay? No, not really. You are going to have to explain this one.
 
PensFault said:
It's always nice to see statists getting butt hurt by my comments.

The free market will always be better than any sort of government manipulated (with the smiley face aid of corporations) illusion of a free market. Free markets have built in regulation and just because none of the statists can imagine up such a scenario doesn't make it untrue. Fascism doesn't beget freedom, it actually destroys it. Freedom sucks though, it's too much responsibility, right? ...
Click to expand...

Please name and cite three truely "free markets" that are not government manipulated or controlled. Then cite 3 that function in a manner that is actually function in a manner desirable to the consumer.

My bet is you cannot name even one, because they have never existed. And never will.
 
PensFault said:
Net Neutrality = Government Regulation = Bad.

The problem, though, is all the other crap these big companies have gotten into the law books. So it's not even remotely a free market where idiotic practices can be corrected through market forces.
Click to expand...

You idiot the government is the only American power that can stop these greedy corporations from raping us. The problem is that they are busily buying up our elected officials. Government is bad? Brainwashed moron and millions more like you in need of an education!! Grow the fuck up fool! Regulation that makes sense protects the American people. Nobody with half a brain can say that all regulations make common sense. Still no reason to blanket condemn them. Tool! :rolleyes:
 
A - AT+T is retarded.

B - Still amazed at how so many people who read [H] regularly still have absolutely no idea what Net Neutrality is.
 
PensFault said:
It's always nice to see statists getting butt hurt by my comments.

The free market will always be better than any sort of government manipulated (with the smiley face aid of corporations) illusion of a free market. Free markets have built in regulation and just because none of the statists can imagine up such a scenario doesn't make it untrue. Fascism doesn't beget freedom, it actually destroys it. Freedom sucks though, it's too much responsibility, right? ...
Click to expand...

Let me guess. The built in regulation is that if people don't like what the company is doing they will go elsewhere. But what happens if the established company kills the upstart? It does happen, more than you think.

I have a great example. I come from a small town. This town is just now getting a Starbucks in it's mall, and of course everyone is excited. However the existing coffee shop is closing next week, well before the Starbucks breaks ground. Why because the mall won't renew it's lease. I'm sure they can't officially say why, but it's likely a cause in the contract to get Starbucks in the area, they didn't want to compete with the existing local shop.

This is the big flaw that a lot of libertarians tend to forget. The free market only regulates when everyone starts off on the same level playing field, which is kind of impossible. Sure anyone can create anything but you are kidding yourself if you think the established companies won't use their advantages to put you out of business. It's human nature.
 
Ryokurin said:
Let me guess. The built in regulation is that if people don't like what the company is doing they will go elsewhere. But what happens if the established company kills the upstart? It does happen, more than you think.
Click to expand...
Yup, policing businesses is the job of government.

Think of them as the referee in a soccer game. If the ref actually tried to micromanage how the players play the game, it would be an inefficient disaster, as its competition between them that makes them great.

But you need a referee to make and enforce a set of rules that ensure fair play between them. One of the things the government is supposed to be doing as a referee, which they are not, is breaking up monopolies. Unfortunately these monopolies have slowly become so powerful that they buy government.

SuperPACS and lobbying and campaign finance and industry employees cycling in between big government positions and corporate ones and what not needs to be completely reformed to prevent such abuses.
 
Ducman69 said:
Yup, policing businesses is the job of government.

Think of them as the referee in a soccer game. If the ref actually tried to micromanage how the players play the game, it would be an inefficient disaster, as its competition between them that makes them great.
Click to expand...

I agree with this function of government. However, in soccer you don't allow the players and coaches to pay...err, sorry, "free speech"...the refs billions of dollars. In politics we do, and that is part of why it is broken.
 
Fuck you At&t. We didn't trust you back when we forced you to split up BECAUSE you were a fucking monopoly and we don't trust you now as you are striving to become one all over again.
 
Well they aren't technically lying. If we kill NN, then they can offer 'internet' but it will be restricted to the ATT home page for 5$/mo. Access to anything else will be additional.

So they will be able to provide cheaper 'internet', but it will be far shittier and will get much more expensive for anyone else.
 
mi7chy said:
I don't buy it knowing AT&T's mission statement is to screw over the consumers whenever and wherever possible.
Click to expand...

This is what I'm dealing with right now... They have me by the balls, I can't wait for them to turn on my shitty DSL 6Mbps connection for $90 a month, but there is a waiting list because there are no more DSL connections available for my area. Instead of improving infrastructure they are tightening their grips, and the only other option is to go with no internets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top