Nobody wants them to regulate EVERYTHING. Net Neutrality talks to keeping the telecoms from being the gate keepers of everything we use on the internet. They are quadruple dipping charging the consumer to receive data, rent a modem, the creator to send the data, and again the consumer in taxes. The last being ironic in that they were title 2 taxes collected, specifically, to rollout a fiber network by 2005ish. Since they no longer have title 2 classification, and never built the infrastructure they promised, maybe they should be required to return all the title 2 taxes they collected to the consumers. That sounds logical to me. But I can guess what the chances of that ever happening would be... 
You have not substantiated, or even posed a position, as to how net neutrality would stifle innovation or infrastructure spending. The reality, and this is provable by looking at the last 20 years, is that the ISP's have intentionally stifled innovation and halted progress in order to maximize profits by not spending money competing. And they are able to do that because they have cut out service areas for themselves to avoid overlap. A small percentage of the population has more than 2 choices for an ISP. And a much smaller percentage has 3. So the consumer is held hostage... and can not exercise his/her spending power to spur innovation through competition.
As I have always said, I am all for capitalism and the free market. But we don't have that, and won't ever have it without some sort of guidelines as to how the ISP's can operate. You can call it regulation if you like, I call it leveling the playing field to allow development and new-comers. You know, that whole anti-trust law thing we used to believe in to go along with our capitalism.
You have not substantiated, or even posed a position, as to how net neutrality would stifle innovation or infrastructure spending. The reality, and this is provable by looking at the last 20 years, is that the ISP's have intentionally stifled innovation and halted progress in order to maximize profits by not spending money competing. And they are able to do that because they have cut out service areas for themselves to avoid overlap. A small percentage of the population has more than 2 choices for an ISP. And a much smaller percentage has 3. So the consumer is held hostage... and can not exercise his/her spending power to spur innovation through competition.
As I have always said, I am all for capitalism and the free market. But we don't have that, and won't ever have it without some sort of guidelines as to how the ISP's can operate. You can call it regulation if you like, I call it leveling the playing field to allow development and new-comers. You know, that whole anti-trust law thing we used to believe in to go along with our capitalism.
Comment