Net neutrality "wins"

[Eastfield Lodge]

Let's try this again.

Monopolies
are the pinnacle
of the free market

the monopoly has been selected by the consumer base as the best service provider, no exceptions.

Here's an example. Read through it fully, please:

Let's say that the "free market" proceeds to such an extent that only one ISP provides internet for the entire country. They've done this through a better quality service, better customer service and generally being one step ahead of their competitors. Now, with no other ISPs competing for a market share, the monopolist ISP has no reason to improve their product, and in fact, because all they want to do is make money for themselves, they decide to reduce the quality to save on costs. But there's nothing people can do, because it's a choice between sticking with rubbish internet, or having absolutely no internet whatsoever. And imagine the impact on the economy as a whole if the internet suddenly stopped.

The point is, because the monopoly has all the control, it can advertise/spend enough to prevent any new ISPs from getting into the market, whilst providing shitty quality that would never have stood in a competitive market. Do you see why this is bad?

[The Black Forrest]

Best is subjective. Monopolies also end advancement.

You also have it wrong.

Better service means more money.

Exactly, and more money means you can beat out competition, until the point where you're king of the hill.

King of the Hill is subjective.

The big companies aren't always the better companies.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Best is subjective. Monopolies also end advancement.

You also have it wrong.

Better service means more money.

Exactly, and more money means you can beat out competition, until the point where you're king of the hill.

What about ''monopolies are bad, competition is necessary'' don't you understand?

[Hanchu]

Yes, but your situation is somewhat unique: many people are in my situation, where Comcast is simultaneously the only option, and the shittiest option. See, what you have is an extremely naive understanding of economics. You're treating macroeconomics like microeconomics. And failing to take into account corruption, graft, human stupidity and croneyism.

Too bad, you should have paid for the alternatives before Comcast ran them out of the area, now your community is paying for their stupidity.

Nope they're the biggest so they are the best .
Your words not mine

[Hurdegaryp]

Yes, but your situation is somewhat unique: many people are in my situation, where Comcast is simultaneously the only option, and the shittiest option. See, what you have is an extremely naive understanding of economics. You're treating macroeconomics like microeconomics. And failing to take into account corruption, graft, human stupidity and croneyism.

Too bad, you should have paid for the alternatives before Comcast ran them out of the area, now your community is paying for their stupidity.

I see your ideal world would be even more control for socio- and psychopaths in positions of wealth and power, combined with the usual corruption and old boy networks.

[Liberty and Linguistics]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't net neutrality what we have now? I've read an article or two on the topic, and it seems that what we have is net neutrality. If so, I'm highly supportive of it, since "internet fast lanes" and all that jazz are a crock of shit.

[The Confederacy of Nationalism]

Too bad, you should have paid for the alternatives before Comcast ran them out of the area, now your community is paying for their stupidity.

Ah. So when a monopoly treats their customers like shit, it's the customers fault. What kind of bullshit victim-blaming is this?

Yes. Customers *should* only select the best option, otherwise what you get is Comcast.

[Bari]

What is net neutrality?

Link

If it is as nice as this article purports it to be, why does it seem so many people oppose it?

[Liberty and Linguistics]

Link

If it is as nice as this article purports it to be, why does it seem so many people oppose it?

To my knowledge, most people are completely fine with it.

[The Klishi Islands]

I've believe John Oliver summed up this issue rather well:

"The cable companies would not create a special fast lane for higher payers. It would be not be Usain Bolt and Usain Bolt on a motorbike. It would be Usain Bolt and Usain Bolt-ed to an anchor. "

[Mike the Progressive]

Except they haven't. Monopolies have risen as the result of policies that favor a specific firm or industry.

When the free market doesn't work, it's because it's not free enough. Very convenient.

I wouldn't say that. It's because there is no such thing as an absolutely free market. Because never in history has a government acted absolutely neutral.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't net neutrality what we have now? I've read an article or two on the topic, and it seems that what we have is net neutrality. If so, I'm highly supportive of it, since "internet fast lanes" and all that jazz are a crock of shit.

IIRC, yes, that's what we have currently.

[The Confederacy of Nationalism]

Too bad, you should have paid for the alternatives before Comcast ran them out of the area, now your community is paying for their stupidity.

Nope they're the biggest so they are the best .
Your words not mine

I never had a problem with comcast.

[Kenora County]

Net neutrality is the idea that internet providers can't give special services to companies that dpeend on the internet right?????

[Hanchu]

And then using they're massive resources they'd buy up your company and kill it off, or Bribe people to refuse to give you loans or resources

Why would I sell my company? Why would loans even matter if the community is that pissed off, I could probably do it off donations if the service was really that bad beforehand/

Because everyone has a price .
Try to get donations if the banks refuse to help you,

[Camicon]

And then using they're massive resources they'd buy up your company and kill it off, or Bribe people to refuse to give you loans or resources

Why would I sell my company? Why would loans even matter if the community is that pissed off, I could probably do it off donations if the service was really that bad beforehand/

Are you aware of how expensive it is to create entirely new infrastructure for something like broadband? Unless you were born a billionaire, you would never have the necessary capital. Even if you were, then the monopoly would throw the entirety of their bulk against you. Your start-up would never see the light of day.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Net neutrality is the idea that internet providers can't give special services to companies that dpeend on the internet right?????

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutra ... neutrality

[The Black Forrest]

Nope they're the biggest so they are the best .
Your words not mine

I never had a problem with comcast.

neat. I had many many problems with them. Your point?

[Mick Swagger]

Yes, but your situation is somewhat unique: many people are in my situation, where Comcast is simultaneously the only option, and the shittiest option. See, what you have is an extremely naive understanding of economics. You're treating macroeconomics like microeconomics. And failing to take into account corruption, graft, human stupidity and croneyism.

Too bad, you should have paid for the alternatives before Comcast ran them out of the area, now your community is paying for their stupidity.

Comcast was dominating my area before I was old enough to vote, let alone be buying my own internet. Not to mention, they got that position by buying up the infrastructure and any competitors, rather than by actually attracting customers. See, what you don't fucking get is that corporations are sneaky, tricky, cheeki breeki bastards who will use any underhanded tool in their kit to conquer market share. They are not benevolent entities, they are entities which exist solely to make money.

[New Genoa]

Ah. So when a monopoly treats their customers like shit, it's the customers fault. What kind of bullshit victim-blaming is this?

Yes. Customers *should* only select the best option, otherwise what you get is Comcast.

But... this entire thread you've been saying being a monopoly means they were the best option. Now they're not?

[The Confederacy of Nationalism]

Exactly, and more money means you can beat out competition, until the point where you're king of the hill.

What about ''monopolies are bad, competition is necessary'' don't you understand?

Competition is necessary to breed monopolies, that is the entire purpose of competition, somebody's got to win.

[Mike the Progressive]

Nope they're the biggest so they are the best .
Your words not mine

I never had a problem with comcast.

So? I've had plenty of problems with them.

[The Confederacy of Nationalism]

Exactly, and more money means you can beat out competition, until the point where you're king of the hill.

King of the Hill is subjective.

The big companies aren't always the better companies.

In the eyes of the public, big companies are ALWAYS better companies, otherwise they wouldn't be big for very long.

[Liberty and Linguistics]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't net neutrality what we have now? I've read an article or two on the topic, and it seems that what we have is net neutrality. If so, I'm highly supportive of it, since "internet fast lanes" and all that jazz are a crock of shit.

IIRC, yes, that's what we have currently.

Let's keep it, then. In the name of the free market, because monopolies are bad, m'kay? The OP talks about how he loves the market, but clearly doesn't, since he doesn't respect the idea of competition.

[The Black Forrest]

When the free market doesn't work, it's because it's not free enough. Very convenient.

I wouldn't say that. It's because there is no such thing as an absolutely free market. Because never in history has a government acted absolutely neutral.

Never mind people wouldn't allow for it anyway.