George Soros Paid $196 Million to Lobby For Net Neutrality.
Comments
-
7 Reasons Net Neutrality Is A Threat To Your Freedom:
The number one reason that every American should consider net neutrality a grave threat is that the Muslim Brotherhood Congressman Hakim Muhammad (Keith Ellison) is dancing after hearing that the FCC voted to approve strong net neutrality rules.
The FCC’s Democrat majority voted on Thursday to fix something that ain’t broken by approving new regulations for the Internet. Republicans are dissenting, darkly suggesting that the new rules in government hands are a threat.
The commission’s chairman, Tom Wheeler, said the new rules will ensure net neutrality by barring Internet service providers like Comcast from charging companies like Netflix for priority data transmission. Considering that ISPs don’t do this, and currently treat all data transmission equally, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-California, accused the FCC of trying to “fix something that is far from broken.”
Here are 7 reasons why the FCC’s new net neutrality rules could be a threat to your freedom.
1. The FCC’s new rules are a heavy-handed government takeover of the Internet.
Under the new rules, broadband Internet is classified as a public utility for the first time ever. This gives the government wide control of private companies like Comcast, Verizon, and Time Warner Cable, reducing their incentives to invest in their respective networks. Without this investment, broadband technology will develop more slowly, and prices will be higher for consumers.
2. Net neutrality subsidizes large companies like Netflix and Facebook who don’t need it.
In November, it was widely reported that Netflix alone accounts for over 35 percent of all Internet traffic in the US. If broadband providers were able to charge Netflix a small fee for the high volume of data they send, they could pass that money onto consumers in the form of lower monthly bills.
3. The new rules subvert democracy and the will of the people.
CBS News reported that two in three Americans are opposed to the idea of government regulating the Internet. Other polls show that opposition to net neutrality is even higher.
4. The new regulations will stifle free speech.
Lee E. Goodman, former chairman and a current commissioner of the Federal Election Commission, told Newsmax TV that a government takeover of the Internet will chill political speech.
“The government will regulate the content — and specifically the political content — that the American people can both post online to express their own political opinions, and the political content and information that people can access from the Internet,” said Goodman, who was appointed to the FEC in 2013 by President Obama.
5. The rule-making process was corrupted by the White House.
President Obama and White House staffers used backchannel meetings to pressure chairman Wheeler into creating the strongest possible net neutrality rules over the more moderate approach he originally intended. In this way, the White House operated “like a parallel version of the FCC itself,” The Wall Street Journal reported.
6. The commission’s vote wasn’t transparent.
The new set of rules ushered in by Thursday’s 3-2 vote were not provided to the public for comment. Ahead of the vote, one of the agency’s five commissioners, Ajit Pai, tweeted a picture of the 317-page plan that he was barred from showing the public. Even after the vote, the rules will not be published publicly for many days.
7. The new rules will hurt the right to privacy, and further empower the federal government to spy on its citizens.
After Edward Snowden leaked the NSA’s secret PRISM surveillance program in 2013, it became clear that the federal government is interested in snooping around in the private affairs of its citizens. Now that the federal government controls the web, its ability to spy will only increase. -
d2d said:
7 Reasons Net Neutrality Is A Threat To Your Freedom:
If broadband providers were able to charge Netflix a small fee for the high volume of data they send, they could pass that money onto consumers in the form of lower monthly bills.
-
Praise be to Allah that Obama is providing us the most transparent administration in history.
Ajit Pai, tweeted a picture of the 317-page plan that he was barred from showing the public. Even after the vote, the rules will not be published publicly for many days. -
When telecommunications were deregulated was it good or bad for the consumer and innovation?
-
From death:
"2. Net neutrality subsidizes large companies like Netflix and Facebook who don’t need it.
In November, it was widely reported that Netflix alone accounts for over 35 percent of all Internet traffic in the US. If broadband providers were able to charge Netflix a small fee for the high volume of data they send, they could pass that money onto consumers in the form of lower monthly bills."
Our costs are less so I'm going to charge you less. Said no company. Ever. However you can bet that Netflix would raise rates. -
Ok, and if that happens people will still pay for it because it's a great deal. If they stop paying for it than Netflix will lower the rates. The market will move on.2001400ex said:From death:
"2. Net neutrality subsidizes large companies like Netflix and Facebook who don’t need it.
In November, it was widely reported that Netflix alone accounts for over 35 percent of all Internet traffic in the US. If broadband providers were able to charge Netflix a small fee for the high volume of data they send, they could pass that money onto consumers in the form of lower monthly bills."
Our costs are less so I'm going to charge you less. Said no company. Ever. However you can bet that Netflix would raise rates.
I'm with Race on this, I don't know enough about it to condemn or praise. I just know I should have the right to form an opinion after reading the document before it's voted on. -
1. Those companies have been stagnant for years. The technology already exists. They've been lobbying to block its implementation. Fucking liars.d2d said:7 Reasons Net Neutrality Is A Threat To Your Freedom:
The number one reason that every American should consider net neutrality a grave threat is that the Muslim Brotherhood Congressman Hakim Muhammad (Keith Ellison) is dancing after hearing that the FCC voted to approve strong net neutrality rules.
The FCC’s Democrat majority voted on Thursday to fix something that ain’t broken by approving new regulations for the Internet. Republicans are dissenting, darkly suggesting that the new rules in government hands are a threat.
The commission’s chairman, Tom Wheeler, said the new rules will ensure net neutrality by barring Internet service providers like Comcast from charging companies like Netflix for priority data transmission. Considering that ISPs don’t do this, and currently treat all data transmission equally, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-California, accused the FCC of trying to “fix something that is far from broken.”
Here are 7 reasons why the FCC’s new net neutrality rules could be a threat to your freedom.
1. The FCC’s new rules are a heavy-handed government takeover of the Internet.
Under the new rules, broadband Internet is classified as a public utility for the first time ever. This gives the government wide control of private companies like Comcast, Verizon, and Time Warner Cable, reducing their incentives to invest in their respective networks. Without this investment, broadband technology will develop more slowly, and prices will be higher for consumers.
2. Net neutrality subsidizes large companies like Netflix and Facebook who don’t need it.
In November, it was widely reported that Netflix alone accounts for over 35 percent of all Internet traffic in the US. If broadband providers were able to charge Netflix a small fee for the high volume of data they send, they could pass that money onto consumers in the form of lower monthly bills.
3. The new rules subvert democracy and the will of the people.
CBS News reported that two in three Americans are opposed to the idea of government regulating the Internet. Other polls show that opposition to net neutrality is even higher.
4. The new regulations will stifle free speech.
Lee E. Goodman, former chairman and a current commissioner of the Federal Election Commission, told Newsmax TV that a government takeover of the Internet will chill political speech.
“The government will regulate the content — and specifically the political content — that the American people can both post online to express their own political opinions, and the political content and information that people can access from the Internet,” said Goodman, who was appointed to the FEC in 2013 by President Obama.
5. The rule-making process was corrupted by the White House.
President Obama and White House staffers used backchannel meetings to pressure chairman Wheeler into creating the strongest possible net neutrality rules over the more moderate approach he originally intended. In this way, the White House operated “like a parallel version of the FCC itself,” The Wall Street Journal reported.
6. The commission’s vote wasn’t transparent.
The new set of rules ushered in by Thursday’s 3-2 vote were not provided to the public for comment. Ahead of the vote, one of the agency’s five commissioners, Ajit Pai, tweeted a picture of the 317-page plan that he was barred from showing the public. Even after the vote, the rules will not be published publicly for many days.
7. The new rules will hurt the right to privacy, and further empower the federal government to spy on its citizens.
After Edward Snowden leaked the NSA’s secret PRISM surveillance program in 2013, it became clear that the federal government is interested in snooping around in the private affairs of its citizens. Now that the federal government controls the web, its ability to spy will only increase.
2. They already held Netflix hostage. Netflix caved. Savings were not passed on to customers *shocker*
3. I'm surprised how little you fucks know about this. And believe it or not, I hold you all in slightly higher regard than the average American. Well maybe not PLSS. That poll question is loaded bullshit, and distracts from the actual issue.
4. Flat out lie. Neutrality prevents those with more resources from purchasing better services, effectively blocking smaller/individual voices. Imagine HH going up against the Fox owned Scout.com network if they were paying to stifle small competitors.
5. Welcome to the real world. The White House always makes their policy wishes known. Why is this even a point?
6. Literally the only valid poont on this list. Knowing the details would allow for informed discussion and critique.
7. CHRIST. They're already spying on us. This changes nothing. Please stay on topic. -
Ajit Varadaraj Pai (born January 10, 1973) is a Commissioner at the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC). He was nominated for a Republican Party position on the commission by President Barack Obama at the recommendation of Mitch McConnell. He was confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate on May 7, 2012 and was sworn in on May 14, 2012 for a term that concludes on June 30, 2016. Pai previously worked as a lawyer for Verizon Communications.
-
BOOM, roasted!AZDuck said:Ajit Varadaraj Pai (born January 10, 1973) is a Commissioner at the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC). He was nominated for a Republican Party position on the commission by President Barack Obama at the recommendation of Mitch McConnell. He was confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate on May 7, 2012 and was sworn in on May 14, 2012 for a term that concludes on June 30, 2016. Pai previously worked as a lawyer for Verizon Communications.
-
fixed.2001400ex said:
It couldn't be because yourd2d said:
Bravo. $196 Million for an "Executive Order" that Obama won't let you read is too much "altruism" to be believed.topdawgnc said:I know it is follow the money, and there is a reason, which I don't know why, that Obama and Soros want this so badly. I am not thinking I will like those reasons when revealed.
BTW, what do you spend $196 Million on? Lobbying? There are only 3 members of the FCC that needed "Lobbying".news source[President] is lying is it?






