General Discussion

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)

45. From your own article:

Thu Feb 27, 2014, 04:33 PM

Feb 2014

The FCC now faces the challenge of crafting new net neutrality regulations that will withstand legal scrutiny. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said last week that the agency plans to do just that.

Your argument is based on faith. Faith that this administration will move against the interests of its major corporate donors to act on behalf of voters sometime in the future, even though they refuse to take clear opportunities to act right now and even though NOT acting now vastly consolidates the corporate power they claim to be so concerned about.

Your argument relies on faith against all current circumstances and past and current behavior. The administration squandered that sort of credibility long ago.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

63 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

WOW, I never saw THIS coming: "Verizon CEO Wants To Charge You More If You Use Too Much Internet" [View all] Miles Archer Feb 2014 OP

If a lot of something is used, usually a better price is provided; volume discount. democratisphere Feb 2014 #1

Your example is completely illogical. Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #2

Verizon already has tiered pricing for data; use more data, pay less/GB. democratisphere Feb 2014 #6

Nothing in the article speaks of charging high users a higher marginal cost Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #9

I'm not sure what you are reading or how you are interpreting this article BUT...... democratisphere Feb 2014 #10

My Comcast business account is unlimited data and Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #11

Agreed. We shall see. democratisphere Feb 2014 #12

I already pay the same usage fees Aerows Feb 2014 #19

Where do they get that right? Is it more costly to upaloopa Feb 2014 #33

that's ludicrous. the best method is charging user fees. not amortizing over everyone's costs Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #38

The administration has no plans to stop it. woo me with science Feb 2014 #3

Agreed. And it really burns me up!!!! democratisphere Feb 2014 #7

Sure, as long as the FCC writing new net neutrality rules is "no plans". (nt) jeff47 Feb 2014 #17

"No plans" is exactly what it is. They are aggressively doing nothing. woo me with science Feb 2014 #42

It's a lovely theory. The problem is the FCC IS creating new rules. jeff47 Feb 2014 #43

From your own article: woo me with science Feb 2014 #45

Well, if you happen to have a time machine, we can shortcut that. jeff47 Feb 2014 #49

You know, once we're at the point where corporate governments woo me with science Feb 2014 #51

No one should be surprised fredamae Feb 2014 #4

How is that different? jeff47 Feb 2014 #15

You do always pay more money for a fatter pipe Aerows Feb 2014 #21

You mean the business pricing model. jeff47 Feb 2014 #23

Destination Aerows Feb 2014 #24

The way I understand it fredamae Feb 2014 #26

And this is about much, much more than costs. This is another axe to democracy. woo me with science Feb 2014 #46

Color me shocked Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #5

So he wants to raise taxes? The Straight Story Feb 2014 #8

Oh, you and your silly analogies Jeff In Milwaukee Feb 2014 #37

I agree with his argument joeglow3 Feb 2014 #13

You will NOT get a break on what you pay DJ13 Feb 2014 #16

You want the additional usage for free because you know there is value joeglow3 Feb 2014 #27

You already pay for a given speed DJ13 Feb 2014 #29

EVERYONE makes decisions on how they think things will go and then re-evaluates joeglow3 Feb 2014 #30

Why do you care? 1awake Feb 2014 #36

It's obviously not "for free" as the telecoms are profitable. El_Johns Feb 2014 #34

How are you subsidizing anything? You are not getting a discount upaloopa Feb 2014 #35

If what you are saying is true, you have nothing to worry about joeglow3 Feb 2014 #40

I pay for a certain allotment of bandwidth SwankyXomb Feb 2014 #14

+1. eom. Bad Thoughts Feb 2014 #18

And they analyze their business decisions when there is sufficient history joeglow3 Feb 2014 #28

This is about crowding out competitors and getting monopolistic control of content, not Marr Feb 2014 #32

That doesn't make sense joeglow3 Feb 2014 #39

Huh. Odd that they aren't out of business then. Marr Feb 2014 #41

New? No. Gaining in popularity? Yes joeglow3 Feb 2014 #48

^^^^^^^This is the correct answer.^^^^^^^ woo me with science Feb 2014 #47

That's exactly what it is. nt laundry_queen Feb 2014 #53

Never knew there was such a thing as Too Much Internet ... Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #20

I can just imagine it... yuiyoshida Feb 2014 #22

If you're a gamer, that includes you Shankapotomus Feb 2014 #25

Call it what it really is: blackmail. Initech Feb 2014 #31

It should be a public utility. jsr Feb 2014 #44

What else do you buy where the total price you pay isn't a function of volume used or bought ? dipsydoodle Feb 2014 #50

You pay more if you watch four hours of TV instead of two?? airplaneman Feb 2014 #57

The impact re: prices will pale in comparison to the impact on citizens from woo me with science Feb 2014 #52

kick woo me with science Feb 2014 #54

good old Verizon airplaneman Feb 2014 #55

DU rec frwrfpos Feb 2014 #56

kick woo me with science Feb 2014 #58

Comcast is probably ready to do the same LiberalEsto Feb 2014 #59

Jeesh with all the corporate whining, you might actually think they provided a good service... JCMach1 Feb 2014 #60

Until the government owns and funds the internet backbone hack89 Feb 2014 #61

This'll cause some hits. Blue_Adept Feb 2014 #62

Post removed Post removed Nov 2019 #63