A good week for Rights

[JoeB131]

It's amazing how ignorant Rott, political chic and others are on this topic.

I'm never amazed by the ignorance of Rott and PC. They sit home all day, listening to Hate Radio, watching Faux News and reading Ayn Rand and they really think that's how the world works.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is there a reason you refuse to answer the very simple questions I've asked?

I have answered.
The problem is that you are educationally ill-equipped to understand the answer.

We both know you didn't answer. Now you're a liar to boot. You should be proud.

I never lie.

I have resisted giving a full explanation of why Net Neutrality is wrong because it is largely beyond your abilities....but if you promise to read it.....

.....I will.


Speak up.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Well, yeah. But this repeal GIVES the ISP cartels Carte Blanche to raise, or set prices at their whims. Under the pretext that there was no ISP cartel (formed by government), then the meritocracy of competition would reign and this wouldn't be a problem. But hwen the government cartelizes a sector, then gives them the go-ahead to set prices however they decide (and in many cases that means the guy with the deepest pocket gets the best deal), you create syndicates. Where larger companies negotiate contracts that will squash their competition. And with no ISP competition where consumers can vote with their subscriptions, you create a corporatist climate, and nothing at all that resembles a free market.

So...you'd rather have government set all prices?

Really?



1. Now, here is the determining criterion as to which is better: which is better able to correct itself? This is the difference between, as Thomas Sowell would say, the free market (constrained) and the Liberal (unconstrained) view of the world. Either side may be wrong about plans, or about programs. But which system is better able to discard the failed and experiment to find the new.

a. The constrained view is that no human beings, nor any conglomeration of same, are omnipotent, nor omniscient, nor omnibenevolent. We are even incapable of knowing the true nature of the problems we face. This may be called the Tragic View. The values of one generation are seen later as absurd: slavery, phenology, lobotomy, women as property, etc.



2. The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand.

a. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.



3. The individual must demand the reduction of state, and state powers to the point necessary to carry out legitimate purposes. We have the instructions, called the Constitution.
Mamet, “The Secret Knowledge,” p. 58-61

Absolutely not. I'd prefer the government not be involved in economic/market affairs at all. BUT, since they have already created ISP cartels, I would prefer to have these cartels instructed by their creators that they are common providers, and can not collude with immunity, with large content providers to destroy the remaining semblance of internet freedom.

Get rid of those fuckin' cartels, as I said, adn i have no problem with the ISP's making such rules for content providers. But only if a competitive meritocracy returns. That means in the ISP world. I want consumers to have as many options as possible, and I want the best regulation there is on market sectors - competition.

If rural delivery agrees to read my post, I will provide an explanation of why Net Neutrality is wrong.
And I would like your view on the post.

 

[RDD_1210]

I have answered.
The problem is that you are educationally ill-equipped to understand the answer.

We both know you didn't answer. Now you're a liar to boot. You should be proud.

I never lie.

I have resisted giving a full explanation of why Net Neutrality is wrong because it is largely beyond your abilities....but if you promise to read it.....

.....I will.


Speak up.

I didn't ask you to give me a full explanation of Net Neutrality. I asked you two very basic questions.

Which post did you answer my two very basic questions?

You didn't.

You are a liar.

 

[RDD_1210]

So...you'd rather have government set all prices?

Really?



1. Now, here is the determining criterion as to which is better: which is better able to correct itself? This is the difference between, as Thomas Sowell would say, the free market (constrained) and the Liberal (unconstrained) view of the world. Either side may be wrong about plans, or about programs. But which system is better able to discard the failed and experiment to find the new.

a. The constrained view is that no human beings, nor any conglomeration of same, are omnipotent, nor omniscient, nor omnibenevolent. We are even incapable of knowing the true nature of the problems we face. This may be called the Tragic View. The values of one generation are seen later as absurd: slavery, phenology, lobotomy, women as property, etc.



2. The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand.

a. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.



3. The individual must demand the reduction of state, and state powers to the point necessary to carry out legitimate purposes. We have the instructions, called the Constitution.
Mamet, “The Secret Knowledge,” p. 58-61

Absolutely not. I'd prefer the government not be involved in economic/market affairs at all. BUT, since they have already created ISP cartels, I would prefer to have these cartels instructed by their creators that they are common providers, and can not collude with immunity, with large content providers to destroy the remaining semblance of internet freedom.

Get rid of those fuckin' cartels, as I said, adn i have no problem with the ISP's making such rules for content providers. But only if a competitive meritocracy returns. That means in the ISP world. I want consumers to have as many options as possible, and I want the best regulation there is on market sectors - competition.

If rural delivery agrees to read my post, I will provide an explanation of why Net Neutrality is wrong.
And I would like your view on the post.

Are you capable of giving an opinion, your own opinion, that isn't cut and paste directly from Redstate or whatever hack site you get your information from? Doubt it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The OP thought striking down Net Neutrality was a good idea just because Obama likes it...no other reason

As always, facts freak out the ultra ignorant [MENTION=25032]ClosedCaption[/MENTION].

First of all, since Obama proudly declares his love of government control, that fact that he "likes it" should be of grave concern to anyone with an ounce of common sense.

Yeah, thats what I said. Is there an echo in here? You dont like it simply because Obama does. That a pretty smart decision making logic there.

Second, and much more importantly, the fact that the entire thing has been driven by a self-professed Marxist who openly admits to hating free markets is glaring evidence again that the entire thing is a Dumbocrat wet-dream of taking over the internet.

Again, is there an echo here. Rott believes that its smart to either agree or disagree with something based on WHO says it not WHAT they say. Awesome

Third, it addresses a "problem" that doesn't exist. Our internet is not censored at all. Our internet is not blocked at all. Why do you think (well, you clearly don't think - but if you did) Obama has been panting like a dog in heat over an internet "kill switch". He no sooner had taken his oath on the hill his first day that he started barking about an internet "kill switch".

That is the entire point. Our Internet is not censored. The people against Net Neutrality wants to add fees to sites that will determine how quickly a site will load up. So sites like Netflix will have fee increases. OK, no problem you might say. Until Redstate or your fav blog doesnt pay this new fee (that you are supporting for no reason) then imagine waiting for that page to load or it looking like an Atari 64. THATS what they are proposing...Making tiers of service instead of being able to access everything on equally. Do you like the way the internet works? Do you want to change it? If not, you're with Obama on this.

I wonder CC - when you visit the ThinkProgress website on the day they finally close their doors and it says "this site no longer exists - please go think for yourself for once" - exactly how much panic will you endure at that moment?

I mean, Obama has literally salivated over the term "internet kill switch" and Net Neutrality is being driven by a self-professed Marxist who proudly proclaims his hatred of FREE MARKETS, and yet you still can't figure out that Net Neutrality is not about expanding the freedom of the internet...

Dude you have literally wasted my time and didnt make ONE POINT why you oppose Net Neutrality based on anything factual. Your entire reasoning is you like the opposite of what Obama does. Why? Just because.

You are literally arguing against the internet you like and have today and are too stupid to realize it

 

[PoliticalChic]

Absolutely not. I'd prefer the government not be involved in economic/market affairs at all. BUT, since they have already created ISP cartels, I would prefer to have these cartels instructed by their creators that they are common providers, and can not collude with immunity, with large content providers to destroy the remaining semblance of internet freedom.

Get rid of those fuckin' cartels, as I said, adn i have no problem with the ISP's making such rules for content providers. But only if a competitive meritocracy returns. That means in the ISP world. I want consumers to have as many options as possible, and I want the best regulation there is on market sectors - competition.

If rural delivery agrees to read my post, I will provide an explanation of why Net Neutrality is wrong.
And I would like your view on the post.

Are you capable of giving an opinion, your own opinion, that isn't cut and paste directly from Redstate or whatever hack site you get your information from? Doubt it.

I understand your fear of reading it.

In fact, that outlook explains your lack of education.

 

[PoliticalChic]

We both know you didn't answer. Now you're a liar to boot. You should be proud.

I never lie.

I have resisted giving a full explanation of why Net Neutrality is wrong because it is largely beyond your abilities....but if you promise to read it.....

.....I will.


Speak up.

I didn't ask you to give me a full explanation of Net Neutrality. I asked you two very basic questions.

Which post did you answer my two very basic questions?

You didn't.

You are a liar.

I never lie.

You don't dictate how I answer or when.

When one converses with a three year old, one must decide how much information they can handle.

I made that calculation in your case....the answer was 'not much.'

 

[RDD_1210]

I never lie.

I have resisted giving a full explanation of why Net Neutrality is wrong because it is largely beyond your abilities....but if you promise to read it.....

.....I will.


Speak up.

I didn't ask you to give me a full explanation of Net Neutrality. I asked you two very basic questions.

Which post did you answer my two very basic questions?

You didn't.

You are a liar.

I never lie.

You don't dictate how I answer or when.

When one converses with a three year old, one must decide how much information they can handle.

I made that calculation in your case....the answer was 'not much.'

I asked you very basic, unbiased questions. You in fact did not answer them yet you claimed you did. That makes you a liar.

If you don't want to have an adult conversation, that's fine. But don't pretend like you are interested in acting like a big girl, when you're clearly not mature enough to use your own brain and be honest with someone you disagree with.

Shame on you.

 

[RDD_1210]

If rural delivery agrees to read my post, I will provide an explanation of why Net Neutrality is wrong.
And I would like your view on the post.

Are you capable of giving an opinion, your own opinion, that isn't cut and paste directly from Redstate or whatever hack site you get your information from? Doubt it.

I understand your fear of reading it.

In fact, that outlook explains your lack of education.

My lack of education is trumping your self proclaimed superiority all over this thread.

Listen, you're simply outclassed on this topic. You don't get it. You really have no business even commenting it seems since you are so clueless. However this is a field I actually work in and I promise you I have a much better understanding then you ever have.

However when we're ready to talk about writing things in numbered lists or being a hypocrite, I'll definitely defer to your expertise.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I didn't ask you to give me a full explanation of Net Neutrality. I asked you two very basic questions.

Which post did you answer my two very basic questions?

You didn't.

You are a liar.

I never lie.

You don't dictate how I answer or when.

When one converses with a three year old, one must decide how much information they can handle.

I made that calculation in your case....the answer was 'not much.'

I asked you very basic, unbiased questions. You in fact did not answer them yet you claimed you did. That makes you a liar.

If you don't want to have an adult conversation, that's fine. But don't pretend like you are interested in acting like a big girl, when you're clearly not mature enough to use your own brain and be honest with someone you disagree with.

Shame on you.

No...it identifies you as a moron.

The complete answer...the one you don't want to hear....is beyond your ability to understand.


I never lie.....especially in revealing your ability....or lack thereof.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Are you capable of giving an opinion, your own opinion, that isn't cut and paste directly from Redstate or whatever hack site you get your information from? Doubt it.

I understand your fear of reading it.

In fact, that outlook explains your lack of education.

My lack of education is trumping your self proclaimed superiority all over this thread.

Listen, you're simply outclassed on this topic. You don't get it. You really have no business even commenting it seems since you are so clueless. However this is a field I actually work in and I promise you I have a much better understanding then you ever have.

However when we're ready to talk about writing things in numbered lists or being a hypocrite, I'll definitely defer to your expertise.

"Listen, you're simply outclassed on this topic. You don't get it. You really have no business even commenting it seems since you are so clueless. However this is a field I actually work in and I promise you I have a much better understanding then you ever have."

Let's see how simple...and in your case, that is the operative term, it is to shred that comment.

How would you know how much I know since you won't give your word to read the answer?

Busted.

I simply asked you to promise to read the answer....and all you've done is sputter and tap-dance.

 

[RDD_1210]

I never lie.

You don't dictate how I answer or when.

When one converses with a three year old, one must decide how much information they can handle.

I made that calculation in your case....the answer was 'not much.'

I asked you very basic, unbiased questions. You in fact did not answer them yet you claimed you did. That makes you a liar.

If you don't want to have an adult conversation, that's fine. But don't pretend like you are interested in acting like a big girl, when you're clearly not mature enough to use your own brain and be honest with someone you disagree with.

Shame on you.

No...it identifies you as a moron.

The complete answer...the one you don't want to hear....is beyond your ability to understand.


I never lie.....especially in revealing your ability....or lack thereof.

LOL. You will do ANYTHING to avoid answering very basic questions that you know will force you to have to have a discussion using your own thoughts and not something you copied and pasted from someone elses site. That sure is a scary thought for such an "intellectual" such as yourself.

 

[RDD_1210]

I understand your fear of reading it.

In fact, that outlook explains your lack of education.

My lack of education is trumping your self proclaimed superiority all over this thread.

Listen, you're simply outclassed on this topic. You don't get it. You really have no business even commenting it seems since you are so clueless. However this is a field I actually work in and I promise you I have a much better understanding then you ever have.

However when we're ready to talk about writing things in numbered lists or being a hypocrite, I'll definitely defer to your expertise.

"Listen, you're simply outclassed on this topic. You don't get it. You really have no business even commenting it seems since you are so clueless. However this is a field I actually work in and I promise you I have a much better understanding then you ever have."

Let's see how simple...and in your case, that is the operative term, it is to shred that comment.

How would you know how much I know since you won't give your word to read the answer?

Busted.

I simply asked you to promise to read the answer....and all you've done is sputter and tap-dance.

I know you don't know anything based upon everything you've said in this thread. You're a hack who quotes hack sites. You exposed yourself completely when you outright refused to answer the simplest of questions about your feelings about the current state of your internet access.

You're a sheep and have somehow convinced yourself you're not.

 

[PoliticalChic]

My lack of education is trumping your self proclaimed superiority all over this thread.

Listen, you're simply outclassed on this topic. You don't get it. You really have no business even commenting it seems since you are so clueless. However this is a field I actually work in and I promise you I have a much better understanding then you ever have.

However when we're ready to talk about writing things in numbered lists or being a hypocrite, I'll definitely defer to your expertise.

"Listen, you're simply outclassed on this topic. You don't get it. You really have no business even commenting it seems since you are so clueless. However this is a field I actually work in and I promise you I have a much better understanding then you ever have."

Let's see how simple...and in your case, that is the operative term, it is to shred that comment.

How would you know how much I know since you won't give your word to read the answer?

Busted.

I simply asked you to promise to read the answer....and all you've done is sputter and tap-dance.

I know you don't know anything based upon everything you've said in this thread. You're a hack who quotes hack sites. You exposed yourself completely when you outright refused to answer the simplest of questions about your feelings about the current state of your internet access.

You're a sheep and have somehow convinced yourself you're not.

Let's review....you were simply asked to agree to read it if I posted a complete response.

For some reason.....this is a frightening concept for you....something you've 'learned' in government schools, no doubt.


You just cannot imagine the gall of someone actually asking you to......think.


So, instead, readers are treated to your preparatory spittle-spewing, subject-changing and fact-avoiding.....
......now for your signature move, soiling your shorts.


I know far more about the subject than you do.....and that is the explanation for your fear.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

PC, I'll read and discuss net neutrailty if you have pertinent information regarding it. I have no stake in the details of it. I think I've explained my position on why I am not in favor of removing rules on ISP.

 

[RDD_1210]

"Listen, you're simply outclassed on this topic. You don't get it. You really have no business even commenting it seems since you are so clueless. However this is a field I actually work in and I promise you I have a much better understanding then you ever have."

Let's see how simple...and in your case, that is the operative term, it is to shred that comment.

How would you know how much I know since you won't give your word to read the answer?

Busted.

I simply asked you to promise to read the answer....and all you've done is sputter and tap-dance.

I know you don't know anything based upon everything you've said in this thread. You're a hack who quotes hack sites. You exposed yourself completely when you outright refused to answer the simplest of questions about your feelings about the current state of your internet access.

You're a sheep and have somehow convinced yourself you're not.

Let's review....you were simply asked to agree to read it if I posted a complete response.

For some reason.....this is a frightening concept for you....something you've 'learned' in government schools, no doubt.


You just cannot imagine the gall of someone actually asking you to......think.


So, instead, readers are treated to your preparatory spittle-spewing, subject-changing and fact-avoiding.....
......now for your signature move, soiling your shorts.


I know far more about the subject than you do.....and that is the explanation for your fear.

And you simply refused to answer my basic questions which I asked pages ago. Then you lied about answering. Now you want to change to something you'd rather discuss.

You literally know nothing about this issue. Literally NOTHING.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Stop already. PC does this everytime someone asks her a question. Has no answers or rebuttals just insults

 

[RDD_1210]

Stop already. PC does this everytime someone asks her a question. Has no answers or rebuttals just insults

You're absolutely right.

I didn't realize she was a pathological liar until this thread.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I know you don't know anything based upon everything you've said in this thread. You're a hack who quotes hack sites. You exposed yourself completely when you outright refused to answer the simplest of questions about your feelings about the current state of your internet access.

You're a sheep and have somehow convinced yourself you're not.

Let's review....you were simply asked to agree to read it if I posted a complete response.

For some reason.....this is a frightening concept for you....something you've 'learned' in government schools, no doubt.


You just cannot imagine the gall of someone actually asking you to......think.


So, instead, readers are treated to your preparatory spittle-spewing, subject-changing and fact-avoiding.....
......now for your signature move, soiling your shorts.


I know far more about the subject than you do.....and that is the explanation for your fear.

And you simply refused to answer my basic questions which I asked pages ago. Then you lied about answering. Now you want to change to something you'd rather discuss.

You literally know nothing about this issue. Literally NOTHING.

I get quite a kick out of exposing the ignorance inherent in those of your persuasion....



"You literally know nothing about this issue."

I offer to compose a response if you will read it...and instead you keep posting that I know nothing about same.

You can't possibly realize how stupid you appear.

Just close your eyes tightly, and put your hands over your ears while mouthing "la..la..la...la.."



*Sneeze* Oh, excuse me! I'm allergic to stupidity.