U.S. Senate votes 52-47 vote to restore Net Neutrality

[busybee01]

ISPs are at best a oligopoly in some instances a monopoly. That was not true earlier in the decade. Government always regulates when that happens. Also you have ISPs now owning content which gives them incentives to slow down certain traffic. That is why we need net neutrality.

Why should a company not be allowed to give preferential treatment to their own products?

Because the ISP is a monopoly or oligopoly. There is no competition to keep them honest. They could slow it down so much that it becomes unreachable.

 

[skye]

It'll be fun watching you guys throw hissy fits when Rump vetoes it.

BINGO!

 

[HappyJoy]

Hopefully it gets vetoed.

When well meaning libertarianism falls flat on its face

 

[HappyJoy]

ISPs are at best a oligopoly in some instances a monopoly. That was not true earlier in the decade. Government always regulates when that happens. Also you have ISPs now owning content which gives them incentives to slow down certain traffic. That is why we need net neutrality.

Why should a company not be allowed to give preferential treatment to their own products?

It stymies commerce a d as already explained ISPs already monopolize regions of the country to where you dont have a choice in the matter.

 

[Kondor3]

More nanny state telling companies how to run their companies.

Is there anyone in the country that does not favor giant government?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Explain exactly what the Net Neutrality rules mean to you.

It is very simple, the Govt controls how ISPs charge people to use their services and how they categorize the data flowing through them.

Amazing how for over 20 years the Internet has flourished into its current state mostly on its own, but suddenly now we somehow need government to step in with "Net Neutrality."

True.

And now we suddenly need such regulation.

Why?

Because the 'start up' days of the Internet are behind us.

Because the Internet is now an integral part of everyday life, like roads and electric lines and phones.

Other utilities are regulated.

Time to regulate this one, as well.

Before all semblance of competition is lost and the survivors become Trust-Bust candidates who gouge the consumer and need slapping down.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Amazing victory for small businesses and rural communities

Who took this away to begin with

Repubs reversed Obama.

Let's just hope trump is as stupid as usual and doesn't take it away again.

++++++++++

Noticing the RWNJs are now in favor of net neutrality. Why?

Go back and read the long tirades on this board where the R nutters ranted against Obama.

 

[Dana7360]

More nanny state telling companies how to run their companies.

Is there anyone in the country that does not favor giant government?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Explain exactly what the Net Neutrality rules mean to you.

It is very simple, the Govt controls how ISPs charge people to use their services and how they categorize the data flowing through them.

Amazing how for over 20 years the Internet has flourished into its current state mostly on its own, but suddenly now we somehow need government to step in with "Net Neutrality."

Net neutrality has existed for a very long time.

The internet has been like that until the trump years of deregulation.

More nanny state telling companies how to run their companies.

Is there anyone in the country that does not favor giant government?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Explain exactly what the Net Neutrality rules mean to you.

It is very simple, the Govt controls how ISPs charge people to use their services and how they categorize the data flowing through them.

Amazing how for over 20 years the Internet has flourished into its current state mostly on its own, but suddenly now we somehow need government to step in with "Net Neutrality."

*shrug* The internet is a constantly evolving thing. Perhaps a safeguard (1 rule) is required to keep it open and equal to allow for innovation and the free exchange of ideas. Allowing providers free reign to disrupt this for a pay-to-play environment stifles this. Without neutrality, the internet will get much, much worse.

It's open and equal to the bandwidth you can afford.

Not in rural areas.

I own a vacation house on the south side of Mt. Rainier. It's a very rural area at the bottom of the mountains.

It's not profitable for Comcast and most cable companies to be out there. To be able to get anything everyone needs a dish.

The internet isn't fast like it is in the city. Rural areas don't even have an option to pay more for a faster internet and cable.

It's not offered.

For the only reason that it's not profitable.

So rural, conservative areas don't have the option for a fast internet but the urban liberal areas do.

 

[expat_panama]

...Amazing how for over 20 years the Internet has flourished into its current state mostly on its own, but suddenly now we somehow need government to step in with "Net Neutrality."

No sweat bro---

Senate backs effort to restore net neutrality, House unlikely to follow...

--not gonna happen.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Free speech and innovative start-up companies were at severe risk

Risk of what?

Pointless law

 

[Desperado]

"All I know is it’s Obama-era regulation. That’s enough for me to say it should be repealed." - President Trump

No argument there. If obama was for it, it cannot be good

 

[JakeStarkey]

The House has to pass it before it can be vetoed.

This issue has a long road in front of it.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

More nanny state telling companies how to run their companies.

Is there anyone in the country that does not favor giant government?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Explain exactly what the Net Neutrality rules mean to you.

It is very simple, the Govt controls how ISPs charge people to use their services and how they categorize the data flowing through them.

Amazing how for over 20 years the Internet has flourished into its current state mostly on its own, but suddenly now we somehow need government to step in with "Net Neutrality."

*shrug* The internet is a constantly evolving thing. Perhaps a safeguard (1 rule) is required to keep it open and equal to allow for innovation and the free exchange of ideas. Allowing providers free reign to disrupt this for a pay-to-play environment stifles this. Without neutrality, the internet will get much, much worse.

It's open and equal to the bandwidth you can afford.

Oh for ***** sake, no. It's definitely not. What an ignorant response. This why throttling is a thing. Verizon does it. Comcast was doing it before the repeal and if you think they won't utilize it now the door for corruption is wide open, you're in denial.

 

[Pilot1]

The big question is has the internet become a utility like electricity, gas, water, sewer, etc which are all regulated by various public utility commissions, and the Feds to a degree. I am not so sure, but I have never had issues with the internet. To me it may be uneseccary government involvement.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why are RWNJs pretending Oama's ruling took away net neutrality?

FACT, its the other way around.

Don't get me wrong. You can all go right on hating him for creating more jobs in a month than the cheeto has in a year. Hate him for saving the world's financial system and pulling your fat butts out of that fire. Hate him for helping people keep their homes. All that and more. I get it. I really do.

But for **** sake, just once, admit that you were wrong.

Net Neutrality: A Free and Open Internet

Senate Votes to Reinstate Obama-Era Net Neutrality Rules

Analysis | Why Trump Wants to Toss Obama’s Net Neutrality Rules: QuickTake

 

[JakeStarkey]

Admit if for just once, alt right: you are wrong.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

The big question is has the internet become a utility like electricity, gas, water, sewer, etc which are all regulated by various public utility commissions, and the Feds to a degree. I am not so sure, but I have never had issues with the internet. To me it may be uneseccary government involvement.

The short answer to that question is yes. The long answer is YEEEEEEESSSSSS

 

[Care4all]

ISPs are at best a oligopoly in some instances a monopoly. That was not true earlier in the decade. Government always regulates when that happens. Also you have ISPs now owning content which gives them incentives to slow down certain traffic. That is why we need net neutrality.

Why should a company not be allowed to give preferential treatment to their own products?

because it kills entrepreneurship and start up companies.... (It prevents them from getting financing, because without net neutrality, there is no guarantee that they would not get pushed to the back of the bus, by ISP's that we the consumer pay for through our service contracts.... the ISP's are deciding that they are going to favor their own side businesses internet speed over a start up's.....)

Net Neutrality is what we have always had, changing it was taking away what has been beneficial for everyone to prosper.

 

[basquebromance]

Here are the US Senators who voted NO on the net neutrality CRA, and how much money they have taken from ISPs

Blunt, Roy (R-MO) — $1,283,416
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) — $1,119,163
Thune, John (R-SD) — $928,428
Burr, Richard (R-NC) — $733,127
Grassley, Chuck (R-IA) — $727,219
Wicker, Roger (R-MS) — $724,850
Hatch, Orrin G (R-UT) — $677,830
Cornyn, John (R-TX) — $622,125
Isakson, Johnny (R-GA) — $532,461
Gardner, Cory (R-CO) — $523,378
Cochran, Thad(R-MS) — $516,280
Graham, Lindsey (R-SC) — $485,442
Roberts, Pat (R-KS) — $463,350
Shelby, Richard C (R-AL) — $443,610
Toomey, Pat (R-PA) — $442,778
Heller, Dean (R-NV) — $440,750
Moran, Jerry (R-KS) — $425,850
Portman, Rob (R-OH) — $421,058
Rubio, Marco (R-FL) — $391,679
Fischer, Deb (R-NE) — $381,550
Cruz, Ted (R-TX) — $322,505
Barrasso, John A (R-WY) — $311,200
Crapo, Mike (R-ID) — $304,559
Alexander, Lamar (R-TN) — $292,268
Scott, Tim (R-SC) — $275,049
Flake, Jeff (R-AZ) — $268,500
Lee, Mike (R-UT) — $256,250
Johnson, Ron (R-WI) — $242,730
Inhofe, James M (R-OK) — $231,659
Boozman, John (R-AR) — $228,050
Enzi, Mike (R-WY) — $209,396
Corker, Bob (R-TN) — $192,325
Daines, Steven (R-MT) — $189,800
Cotton, Tom (R-AR) — $177,660
Capito, Shelley Moore (R-WV) — $171,699
Cassidy, Bill (R-LA) — $163,999
Perdue, David (R-GA) — $133,450
Tillis, Thom (R-NC) — $124,700
Sullivan, Dan (R-AK) — $123,650
Rounds, Mike (R-SD) — $120,898
Young, Todd (R-IN) — $118,650
Lankford, James (R-OK) — $116,550
Paul, Rand (R-KY) — $116,278
Hoeven, John (R-ND) — $108,520
Sasse, Ben (R-NE) — $75,950
Risch, James E (R-ID) — $59,750
Ernst, Joni (R-IA) — $44,500

 

[NightFox]

Amazing victory for small businesses and rural communities

Er..um... it's not a done deal, still has to pass in the House which is far from a sure thing.

… and restoration of Net Neutrality isn't any sort of "victory" for anybody except gub'mint worshippers that want the heavy hand of bureaucrats and politicians ******* up innovation on the Internet.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Here are the US Senators who voted NO on the net neutrality CRA, and how much money they have taken from ISPs

Blunt, Roy (R-MO) — $1,283,416
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) — $1,119,163
Thune, John (R-SD) — $928,428
Burr, Richard (R-NC) — $733,127
Grassley, Chuck (R-IA) — $727,219
Wicker, Roger (R-MS) — $724,850
Hatch, Orrin G (R-UT) — $677,830
Cornyn, John (R-TX) — $622,125
Isakson, Johnny (R-GA) — $532,461
Gardner, Cory (R-CO) — $523,378
Cochran, Thad(R-MS) — $516,280
Graham, Lindsey (R-SC) — $485,442
Roberts, Pat (R-KS) — $463,350
Shelby, Richard C (R-AL) — $443,610
Toomey, Pat (R-PA) — $442,778
Heller, Dean (R-NV) — $440,750
Moran, Jerry (R-KS) — $425,850
Portman, Rob (R-OH) — $421,058
Rubio, Marco (R-FL) — $391,679
Fischer, Deb (R-NE) — $381,550
Cruz, Ted (R-TX) — $322,505
Barrasso, John A (R-WY) — $311,200
Crapo, Mike (R-ID) — $304,559
Alexander, Lamar (R-TN) — $292,268
Scott, Tim (R-SC) — $275,049
Flake, Jeff (R-AZ) — $268,500
Lee, Mike (R-UT) — $256,250
Johnson, Ron (R-WI) — $242,730
Inhofe, James M (R-OK) — $231,659
Boozman, John (R-AR) — $228,050
Enzi, Mike (R-WY) — $209,396
Corker, Bob (R-TN) — $192,325
Daines, Steven (R-MT) — $189,800
Cotton, Tom (R-AR) — $177,660
Capito, Shelley Moore (R-WV) — $171,699
Cassidy, Bill (R-LA) — $163,999
Perdue, David (R-GA) — $133,450
Tillis, Thom (R-NC) — $124,700
Sullivan, Dan (R-AK) — $123,650
Rounds, Mike (R-SD) — $120,898
Young, Todd (R-IN) — $118,650
Lankford, James (R-OK) — $116,550
Paul, Rand (R-KY) — $116,278
Hoeven, John (R-ND) — $108,520
Sasse, Ben (R-NE) — $75,950
Risch, James E (R-ID) — $59,750
Ernst, Joni (R-IA) — $44,500

And those who voted "yes" and the money they took from the supporters of net neutrality?

I support net neutrality, but let's play this fairly.