I'm sure this is a stunner to all and sundry...

[agilebrit]

But, shockingly, my child, yes, I do actually care more about something in my industry that may affect me down the road much more than I care about something that probably (a) will not affect me at all, and (b) I cannot affect in the first place

Comments

[agilebrit]

Well, and see my addendum above, "make it easier for more private businesses to move in." From what I'm seeing of an admittedly cursory look at an article on the subject, it's actually local municipalities making it harder for new companies to come in and use the public light poles and things for the wiring needed, so something needs to be done about that.

But I do not trust the government that wants to take Rush and Hannity off the air via the Fairness Doctrine, the government that weaponized the IRS against conservative nonprofits, the government that thinks I'm a "danger" because I'm a life member of the NRA, to decide what "fair" means. In any context.

And, like I say, if bad things do happen, well, fine. Do something about it. Breaking up the monopolistic hold some of these companies have would be a good start, I think, because, hey, I don't like megacorps any more than anyone else does, really, because I think they get too big for their britches and are anti-competitive. But I saw net neutrality as a sort of pre-emptive strike when it went down... and I'm less of a fan of the federal government than I am of megacorps.

[texanfan]

I understand the distrust of the government. Their ability to bungle things is quite legendary. As I understand it, what we're losing with the loss of net neutrality is the ability to stop major telecommunication corporations such as Comcast or Spectrum from throttling the signal of competitive voices. Possibly Netflix and Amazon Prime are now too big to throttle, possibly not. But just for arguments sake, let's say the wheel turns and left wing liberals are in control. Suddenly you find your access to conservative voices shut down.

I must admit, I've been researching Theodore Roosevelt recently and it's got me thinking of the damage lack of competition can do in the marketplace.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm also seeing far too many of these politicians being bought and sold by megacorporations making something of a mockery of a system that was already pretty broken.

[werewolf_hacker]

I just don't trust the FCC, under any administration, to do right by anyone. It will always be political, especially from here on out, because somehow, while I wasn't looking, everything became political. And it sucks. But I trust the market (especially if we can free it up more! I agree that lack of competition is very damaging) far more than I trust the government. Like I say, if something egregiously awful happens, then we can take a look at yet another law. But I instinctively fall on the side of less regulation, especially from the Federal side, every time. We're drowning in regulation, and it's got to stop.

[texanfan]

Many regulations need to be revised or eliminated. I think we're simply going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

[werewolf_hacker]

:) And, you know, I've barely scratched the surface of research on this. I'm willing to have my mind changed. But I'm coming at it from an admittedly very biased viewpoint that government just needs to sit down and shut up and stop trying to micromanage everything. Because everything that government touches just gets crappier.

[texanfan]

It is a complex issue, and terribly politicized. The world we live in has gotten to the point where you can't have a conversation without talking politics and that is sad. Here are two articles that might explain what is going on.

From Fortune magazine http://fortune.com/2017/11/23/net-neutrality-explained-what-it-means-and-why-it-matters/
And from Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/11/24/how-fccs-move-on-net-neutrality-could-impact-consumers.html

I tried to shy away from any alarmist articles. It's always good to be informed.