micromanaging the internet

[koshergrl]

There is no competition when the government has the monopoly.

Sorry, you can't have it both ways.

You have no clue what you are talking about. Government is a necessity while private monopolies are not.

I didn't say government wasn't a necessity.

I said a government monopoly is still a monopoly.

Monopolies that arise out of the free market can at least be challenged by individuals with chutzpah.

You can't challenge a government monopoly because to do so is ILLEGAL.

Forgive me for asking, but what exactly is a "government monopoly"?

I forgive you for asking. You were probably educated in a government school, which explains your confusion over the common terms used in the discussions you choose to participate in.

"The most prominent example of a state the monopoly is law and the legitimate use of physical force.[1] In many countries, the postal system is run by the government with competition forbidden by law in some or all services. Also, government monopolies on public utilities, telecommunications and railroads have historically been common, though recent decades have seen a strong privatization trend throughout the industrialized world.

"In Nordic countries some goods deemed harmful are distributed through a government monopoly. For example, in Finland, Iceland, Norwayand Sweden, government-owned companies have monopolies for selling alcoholic beverages. Casinos and other institutions for gamblingmight also be monopolized. In Finland, the government has also a monopoly to operate slot machines.

"Governments often create or allow monopolies to exist and grant them patents. This limits entry and allow the patent-holding firm to earn a monopoly profit from an invention.

"Health care systems where the government controls the industry and specifically prohibits competition, such as in Canada, are government monopolies.[2]
State monopoly - Wikipedia

Do we have any of those in this country?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I really don't think it's my job to talk to you in baby talk. Read.

An Easy Understanding of Government Monopoly With Examples

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You have no clue what you are talking about. Government is a necessity while private monopolies are not.

I didn't say government wasn't a necessity.

I said a government monopoly is still a monopoly.

Monopolies that arise out of the free market can at least be challenged by individuals with chutzpah.

You can't challenge a government monopoly because to do so is ILLEGAL.

Forgive me for asking, but what exactly is a "government monopoly"?

I forgive you for asking. You were probably educated in a government school, which explains your confusion over the common terms used in the discussions you choose to participate in.

"The most prominent example of a state the monopoly is law and the legitimate use of physical force.[1] In many countries, the postal system is run by the government with competition forbidden by law in some or all services. Also, government monopolies on public utilities, telecommunications and railroads have historically been common, though recent decades have seen a strong privatization trend throughout the industrialized world.

"In Nordic countries some goods deemed harmful are distributed through a government monopoly. For example, in Finland, Iceland, Norwayand Sweden, government-owned companies have monopolies for selling alcoholic beverages. Casinos and other institutions for gamblingmight also be monopolized. In Finland, the government has also a monopoly to operate slot machines.

"Governments often create or allow monopolies to exist and grant them patents. This limits entry and allow the patent-holding firm to earn a monopoly profit from an invention.

"Health care systems where the government controls the industry and specifically prohibits competition, such as in Canada, are government monopolies.[2]
State monopoly - Wikipedia

Do we have any of those in this country?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I really don't think it's my job to talk to you in baby talk. Read.

An Easy Understanding of Government Monopoly With Examples

Buzzle...now that is funny! But it does help me to understand you more since I know now where you get your information from.

That aside, according to your own link the only real "government monopoly" in the US are Penn and Utah liquor laws.

And with that being the case, why the hell do you right wing hack keep bringing it up?

 

[koshergrl]

I didn't say government wasn't a necessity.

I said a government monopoly is still a monopoly.

Monopolies that arise out of the free market can at least be challenged by individuals with chutzpah.

You can't challenge a government monopoly because to do so is ILLEGAL.

Forgive me for asking, but what exactly is a "government monopoly"?

I forgive you for asking. You were probably educated in a government school, which explains your confusion over the common terms used in the discussions you choose to participate in.

"The most prominent example of a state the monopoly is law and the legitimate use of physical force.[1] In many countries, the postal system is run by the government with competition forbidden by law in some or all services. Also, government monopolies on public utilities, telecommunications and railroads have historically been common, though recent decades have seen a strong privatization trend throughout the industrialized world.

"In Nordic countries some goods deemed harmful are distributed through a government monopoly. For example, in Finland, Iceland, Norwayand Sweden, government-owned companies have monopolies for selling alcoholic beverages. Casinos and other institutions for gamblingmight also be monopolized. In Finland, the government has also a monopoly to operate slot machines.

"Governments often create or allow monopolies to exist and grant them patents. This limits entry and allow the patent-holding firm to earn a monopoly profit from an invention.

"Health care systems where the government controls the industry and specifically prohibits competition, such as in Canada, are government monopolies.[2]
State monopoly - Wikipedia

Do we have any of those in this country?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I really don't think it's my job to talk to you in baby talk. Read.

An Easy Understanding of Government Monopoly With Examples

Buzzle...now that is funny! But it does help me to understand you more since I know now where you get your information from.

That aside, according to your own link the only real "government monopoly" in the US are Penn and Utah liquor laws.

And with that being the case, why the hell do you right wing hack keep bringing it up?

Your logical fallacy is ad hominem

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Forgive me for asking, but what exactly is a "government monopoly"?

I forgive you for asking. You were probably educated in a government school, which explains your confusion over the common terms used in the discussions you choose to participate in.

"The most prominent example of a state the monopoly is law and the legitimate use of physical force.[1] In many countries, the postal system is run by the government with competition forbidden by law in some or all services. Also, government monopolies on public utilities, telecommunications and railroads have historically been common, though recent decades have seen a strong privatization trend throughout the industrialized world.

"In Nordic countries some goods deemed harmful are distributed through a government monopoly. For example, in Finland, Iceland, Norwayand Sweden, government-owned companies have monopolies for selling alcoholic beverages. Casinos and other institutions for gamblingmight also be monopolized. In Finland, the government has also a monopoly to operate slot machines.

"Governments often create or allow monopolies to exist and grant them patents. This limits entry and allow the patent-holding firm to earn a monopoly profit from an invention.

"Health care systems where the government controls the industry and specifically prohibits competition, such as in Canada, are government monopolies.[2]
State monopoly - Wikipedia

Do we have any of those in this country?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I really don't think it's my job to talk to you in baby talk. Read.

An Easy Understanding of Government Monopoly With Examples

Buzzle...now that is funny! But it does help me to understand you more since I know now where you get your information from.

That aside, according to your own link the only real "government monopoly" in the US are Penn and Utah liquor laws.

And with that being the case, why the hell do you right wing hack keep bringing it up?

Your logical fallacy is ad hominem

This coming from you is pretty damn funny. Too bad you do not have the intelligence to see the irony. Irony is so often lost on the ignorant.

 

[koshergrl]

Meanwhile...

"...the progressive left believe that government monopolies are necessary to remedy market failure.

"The progressive argument seems to run as follows: to solve the perceived problem of market failure, all that is necessary is to make the corporate monopoly sufficiently large and powerful, admitting no competitors whatever, and to call that corporate monopoly “government.”

"Here, again, is the paradox observed above — that of taking it for granted that government actors somehow exist outside the world of incentives, interests, and imperfect knowledge.

"They don’t, of course, and more often than not government’s rulemaking power is captured by the richest, most well-organized corporate interests.

"Through this power, they are able to coercively exclude their competitors and obtain special privileges unavailable to smaller companies and newer market entrants."

Break up big government: The case against monopolies

 

[koshergrl]

I forgive you for asking. You were probably educated in a government school, which explains your confusion over the common terms used in the discussions you choose to participate in.

"The most prominent example of a state the monopoly is law and the legitimate use of physical force.[1] In many countries, the postal system is run by the government with competition forbidden by law in some or all services. Also, government monopolies on public utilities, telecommunications and railroads have historically been common, though recent decades have seen a strong privatization trend throughout the industrialized world.

"In Nordic countries some goods deemed harmful are distributed through a government monopoly. For example, in Finland, Iceland, Norwayand Sweden, government-owned companies have monopolies for selling alcoholic beverages. Casinos and other institutions for gamblingmight also be monopolized. In Finland, the government has also a monopoly to operate slot machines.

"Governments often create or allow monopolies to exist and grant them patents. This limits entry and allow the patent-holding firm to earn a monopoly profit from an invention.

"Health care systems where the government controls the industry and specifically prohibits competition, such as in Canada, are government monopolies.[2]
State monopoly - Wikipedia

Do we have any of those in this country?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I really don't think it's my job to talk to you in baby talk. Read.

An Easy Understanding of Government Monopoly With Examples

Buzzle...now that is funny! But it does help me to understand you more since I know now where you get your information from.

That aside, according to your own link the only real "government monopoly" in the US are Penn and Utah liquor laws.

And with that being the case, why the hell do you right wing hack keep bringing it up?

Your logical fallacy is ad hominem

This coming from you is pretty damn funny. Too bad you do not have the intelligence to see the irony. Irony is so often lost on the ignorant.

Now you're just stealing my material.

You're like fakey that way. Are you related?

You probably are.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Do we have any of those in this country?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I really don't think it's my job to talk to you in baby talk. Read.

An Easy Understanding of Government Monopoly With Examples

Buzzle...now that is funny! But it does help me to understand you more since I know now where you get your information from.

That aside, according to your own link the only real "government monopoly" in the US are Penn and Utah liquor laws.

And with that being the case, why the hell do you right wing hack keep bringing it up?

Your logical fallacy is ad hominem

This coming from you is pretty damn funny. Too bad you do not have the intelligence to see the irony. Irony is so often lost on the ignorant.

Now you're just stealing my material.

You're like fakey that way. Are you related?

You probably are.

I am your father!

 

[koshergrl]

"
The truth is counterintuitive: great accumulations of power are inherently predisposed to oversight and miscalculation, “whereas,” as Wilhelm Röpke remarked, “the smaller concern is distinguished for its greater pliability and resistance to crises.”

"Real reform must zero in on decentralization, guided by the revolutionary institutional insights of economists like Elinor Ostrom."
Break up big government: The case against monopolies

Elinor Ostrom:

".... "Ostrom cautioned against single governmental units at global level to solve the collective action problem of coordinating work against environmental destruction. Partly, this is due to their complexity, and partly to the diversity of actors involved. Her proposal was that of a polycentric approach, where key management decisions should be made as close to the scene of events and the actors involved as possible."[27]"

Elinor Ostrom - Wikipedia

This is interesting..figures that she never got any press time. Rec'd a Nobel Peace Prize:

"Challenged the conventional wisdom by demonstrating how local property can be successfully managed by local commons without any regulation by central authorities or privatization."

Elinor Ostrom - Facts

 

[koshergrl]

I really don't think it's my job to talk to you in baby talk. Read.

An Easy Understanding of Government Monopoly With Examples

Buzzle...now that is funny! But it does help me to understand you more since I know now where you get your information from.

That aside, according to your own link the only real "government monopoly" in the US are Penn and Utah liquor laws.

And with that being the case, why the hell do you right wing hack keep bringing it up?

Your logical fallacy is ad hominem

This coming from you is pretty damn funny. Too bad you do not have the intelligence to see the irony. Irony is so often lost on the ignorant.

Now you're just stealing my material.

You're like fakey that way. Are you related?

You probably are.

I am your father! View attachment 166593

Unlikely, since fakey is homo of the type that can't get it up around women. Most likely you are too.

And my mom got pregnant the traditional way...on her wedding night. Via sex.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Buzzle...now that is funny! But it does help me to understand you more since I know now where you get your information from.

That aside, according to your own link the only real "government monopoly" in the US are Penn and Utah liquor laws.

And with that being the case, why the hell do you right wing hack keep bringing it up?

Your logical fallacy is ad hominem

This coming from you is pretty damn funny. Too bad you do not have the intelligence to see the irony. Irony is so often lost on the ignorant.

Now you're just stealing my material.

You're like fakey that way. Are you related?

You probably are.

I am your father! View attachment 166593

Unlikely, since fakey is homo of the type that can't get it up around women. Most likely you are too.

And my mom got pregnant the traditional way...on her wedding night. Via sex.

I remember it well, she was a hot little number back then.

 

[koshergrl]

Your logical fallacy is ad hominem

This coming from you is pretty damn funny. Too bad you do not have the intelligence to see the irony. Irony is so often lost on the ignorant.

Now you're just stealing my material.

You're like fakey that way. Are you related?

You probably are.

I am your father! View attachment 166593

Unlikely, since fakey is homo of the type that can't get it up around women. Most likely you are too.

And my mom got pregnant the traditional way...on her wedding night. Via sex.

I remember it well, she was a hot little number back then.

No you are not my father.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

This coming from you is pretty damn funny. Too bad you do not have the intelligence to see the irony. Irony is so often lost on the ignorant.

Now you're just stealing my material.

You're like fakey that way. Are you related?

You probably are.

I am your father! View attachment 166593

Unlikely, since fakey is homo of the type that can't get it up around women. Most likely you are too.

And my mom got pregnant the traditional way...on her wedding night. Via sex.

I remember it well, she was a hot little number back then.

No you are not my father.

how do you know?

 

[koshergrl]

Now you're just stealing my material.

You're like fakey that way. Are you related?

You probably are.

I am your father! View attachment 166593

Unlikely, since fakey is homo of the type that can't get it up around women. Most likely you are too.

And my mom got pregnant the traditional way...on her wedding night. Via sex.

I remember it well, she was a hot little number back then.

No you are not my father.

how do you know?

I look just like my dad.
Who, incidentally, died in 1993.

 

[dblack]

Buy a decent comp and contract for decent DL speeds, and so shall they all.

I do expect that we will start to see tiers of service like cable TV packages once the Telecoms figure out what the FTC will allow and what it will not.

So, only companies in bed with the the feds will be afforded this privilege. Typical. Government never deregulates. It only REregulates.

 

[bendog]

Buy a decent comp and contract for decent DL speeds, and so shall they all.

I do expect that we will start to see tiers of service like cable TV packages once the Telecoms figure out what the FTC will allow and what it will not.

So, only companies in bed with the the feds will be afforded this privilege. Typical. Government never deregulates. It only REregulates.

I think the telecoms will see a decided advantage in purchasing entertainment providers who will face at least threats of having to pay for better transmission

 

[dblack]

Buy a decent comp and contract for decent DL speeds, and so shall they all.

I do expect that we will start to see tiers of service like cable TV packages once the Telecoms figure out what the FTC will allow and what it will not.

So, only companies in bed with the the feds will be afforded this privilege. Typical. Government never deregulates. It only REregulates.

I think the telecoms will see a decided advantage in purchasing entertainment providers who will face at least threats of having to pay for better transmission

Only those who cozy up to the regulators.

 

[sakinago]

No, you didn't state that point. You just kept parroting the idiocy that the elimination of government micromanagement would result in micromanagement...without justifying or explaining it.

And you still haven't justified it. Your argument just seems to be "everything is micromanagement".

Ok, back to the OP...

Does this sounds like micromanagement or not? A simple yes or no will do.

each decision to block, throttle or give paid prioritization to content will be evaluated by the FTC and approved or disapproved by them.

Since when does the left care about micromanaging? Our federal register page is over 80,000 pages long...and your problem with getting rid of net neutrality (government inserting themselves where they don’t belong, trying to “fix” a problem they created...by not actually fixing it) is that it seems like it’s micromanaging....Dipshit if Comcast wants to charge Netflix extra because their traffic is what accounts for most of their broadband...they should be able to do so. Where were all these problems of so and so wanting to shut out Fox News/CNN/whatever before net neutrality????? They didn’t exist! Net neutrality is a position taken by streaming services, BC they didn’t want to pay more for the traffic their users cause, and they could blame the constant buffering on internet providers. Getting rid of net neutrality actually helps Netflix get the required amount of broadband to deal with their traffic since these companies will obviously allocate the Necessary resources to make sure the streaming happens smoothly (if they want to keep their customers). I don’t think FTC needs to give a thumbs up or down on stuff (really this was just to shut up the people crying about net neutrality who don’t know what they’re talking about), but I certainly prefer that over net neutrality.

Again 80,000 pages of regulation, you need a license for almost everything, and then have to fill out 12 forms before you can wipe your own ass, while you plug in your government approved LED lightbulb...and this is what you care about???

The left does not care about micromanaging, but I do not know what that has to do with me or this thread.

So...you’re defending a bill, that was created by google for google (Netflix, Hulu, Amazon), that petitioned government to not let ISPs have control of their broadband pathways they spent billions investing in..,and you’re claiming the alternative to that bill(this bill has only been around 2 years), which is rolling back two years ago, and government staying out of the way of multi billion dollar corporations fueds...a feud that actually made Netflix (who was using a full THIRD OF ALL BANDWITH) streaming service better. Somehow that (having government come in to help out soon to be trillion dollar Corp google) is not micromanaging to you...but getting government out of the way when it comes to ISPs having control of the ISP billion dollar infastrure they built is....just because people were crying about a problem THAT NEVER EXISTED IN THE FIRST PLACE (since it would be a terrible business model to choke off sites), so FTC says we won’t let Verizon/Comcast/etc. choke out Fox News/ CNN/Porn hub/ etc. Again there’s 80,000 pages of regulation...and this is what you’re complaining about?

Believe me, I have no love for ISPs. The reason our internet sucks but is still super expensive compared to the rest of the world, is that they went to government, to get regulation passed in their favor, to get rid of competition....just like google with net neutrality. And instead of addressing that issue, getting government to stop choking out competition in ISPs, your answer is more government involvement, not even addressing the original problems in the first place.

There was nothing neutral about net neutrality. The internet is probably the least regulated industry in existence, and is a shining example of what the free market system is capable of...when you leave it alone. So instead of having billion dollar corps, tattling on each other, and having government fight their battles for them...we should be telling government, get the F out of the way, the leaders at these corps are smarter than 90% of you law makers and officials anyway, let them figure it out, and let the people vote on with their dollars on what they like better.

What you fail to realize is that we are dealing with a monopoly. The rules are different for a monopoly. Many communities have only 1 ISP. Electric companies are regulated by states so they do not have control of their infrastructure. As a result consumers cannot vote with their dollars.

In many ways ISPs are a natural monopoly. Presently it takes a pipeline made up of physical wiring. The reason that prices are high is because of this monopoly. Do you think the rest of the world allows ISPs to run wild with no regulation? ISPs are subject to the same economic rules as any other company. When you have no competition, prices go up.

The government has a place in this. Regulate monopolies just as they would the electric company. Net neutrality did address a problem that was brewing. ISPs did do some throttling on a limited basis. They have been trying to figure out how to squeeze more money out of their monopoly by buying out their peers. All that stood in their way was net neutrality. Also the fact that ISPs are trying to get content also creates conflicts of interest. Comcast already owns Universal. and AT&T wants Warner. They control the pipelines that allow consumers to access Warner and vice versa with Universal. This is called consumer protection which is a foreign language to this administration.

No they are not monopolies. They a certainly dominant, certainly more dominant than they should be. The reason why they are that dominant is because of government regulation.

So the answer to government regulation tilting scales in favor of big players...SHOULD NOT BE MORE GOVERNMENT REGULATION TILTING THE SCALES IN FAVOR OF MORE BIG BUSINESS....

NN DOES NOTHING TO FIX THE FACT THAT THESE “MONOPOLIES” EXIST.