Ding Ding. This guy gets it. Regulations and powerful government is what gives companies the ability to buy influence, and provides the opportunity for graft.
He can't set himself up as a reseller. There's no way in hell a small reseller could survive under Title II regulations, exactly as designed and intended.
Why should they? Franchise agreements guarantee them a reliable customer base. They feel no pressure to compete or provide better service to their customers.
I don't think you protested rule by majority when Democrats were in power. Your statement is just a bunch of partisan BS. Democrats have set the precedent, Republicans will now continue it.
No they can't. Harry Reid's legacy and precedent is that the rules of the Senate can be changed with a simple majority vote. If he can partially revoke the filibuster rules, they can be completely revoked, and they should be.
No, they have the FCC to blame. That is reality. The FCC decided on a scorched earth policy to enact net neutrality rules that the courts decided were outside their authority.
The legislature may not pass a law that you like, but they can certainly pass any law they like right now. It's the Executive branch that is the obstacle.
It does neither. The only monopolies we have in Internet providers, are monopolies facilitated by the government. Option #3 should read, "take money from telecom, grant monopoly status, and then regulate the telecom after accusing it of being a monopoly."
The FCC also heavily regulated the telecom industry. We had no innovation for decades. We had to pay per minute fees for long distance calls. Do you want that sort of environment for the internet?
The parent means that if you want to cross, you'll either make it through, or you'll be caught and released inside the country. Your chances of deportation are almost nil.
You have that precisely backwards. Their stance on guns is a projection of their feelings, not a rational response to facts. Same with education, or health care, or immigration, or just about any other issue you care to choose.
Slashdot Mirror
2/3rd of the House, Senate, and the States have to agree. Not going to happen. On the other hand, who cares about the Constitution any more?
Ding Ding. This guy gets it. Regulations and powerful government is what gives companies the ability to buy influence, and provides the opportunity for graft.
No, I see a bunch of heavily regulated companies in heavily regulated markets. It's no surprise that we have monopolies and near monopolies.
He can't set himself up as a reseller. There's no way in hell a small reseller could survive under Title II regulations, exactly as designed and intended.
Where was this "Free Market" you speak of?
Why should they? Franchise agreements guarantee them a reliable customer base. They feel no pressure to compete or provide better service to their customers.
I don't think you protested rule by majority when Democrats were in power. Your statement is just a bunch of partisan BS. Democrats have set the precedent, Republicans will now continue it.
No they can't. Harry Reid's legacy and precedent is that the rules of the Senate can be changed with a simple majority vote. If he can partially revoke the filibuster rules, they can be completely revoked, and they should be.
No, they have the FCC to blame. That is reality. The FCC decided on a scorched earth policy to enact net neutrality rules that the courts decided were outside their authority.
Shooting anyone is illegal. Hating someone is not.
Of course all that is true. But this time it will be different, just you wait and see.
The legislature may not pass a law that you like, but they can certainly pass any law they like right now. It's the Executive branch that is the obstacle.
Not my ISP.
They don't present their argument at this stage.
Why was it necessary to enact Title II status to do that? Are you saying that's all this rule does?
It does neither. The only monopolies we have in Internet providers, are monopolies facilitated by the government. Option #3 should read, "take money from telecom, grant monopoly status, and then regulate the telecom after accusing it of being a monopoly."
Take my money and use it to pay a woman who does what she wants with her own body. That position is just as ridiculous.
You meant Liberals, not liberals. You have no idea what the word liberal actually means.
The FCC also heavily regulated the telecom industry. We had no innovation for decades. We had to pay per minute fees for long distance calls. Do you want that sort of environment for the internet?
Do you see a difference between a photograph and biometric data? That's the difference.
The parent means that if you want to cross, you'll either make it through, or you'll be caught and released inside the country. Your chances of deportation are almost nil.
No, not like the Berlin wall. A wall designed to keep people out, not in.
You have that precisely backwards. Their stance on guns is a projection of their feelings, not a rational response to facts. Same with education, or health care, or immigration, or just about any other issue you care to choose.
And Organic food lovers. And Vegans, And people that believe in the power of crystals.
http://www.merriam-webster.com...