How do you make something more free and accessible? Why, more government regulation, of course. When government says they will regulate something, it always ends up being more accessible to all, with more freedom resulting, not less.

Net neutrality is one way to accomplish mandatory fairness, but on the internet. This topic has been on the back burner for years, but now President Obama is resurrecting the issue to confuse and divide conservatives (which we fully support.)

It's not fair when someone has more money to contribute to anything in life. The rich should not use more than their fair share of anything, including the internet. The Progressive Dictionary defines the "Rich" as:

[rich] n. 1. Anyone with a job. 2. Anyone with enough disposable income to pay more for a premium good or service i.e., almost every American.

President Obama believes that websites with large budgets (obviously republican-owned) should not have more of an advantage over high-schooler blogs (obviously liberal-owned.) By giving the liberal high-schooler blog free advertising that the republican-owned mega-website pays for, just as many people will see the liberal blog and vote Democrat (or so the theory goes.)

We at the People's Cube would like to discuss one major roadblock on the way to net neutrality. In the past, when liberal and conservative entities have been on equal footing, the liberal one usually loses out. For example:

1. When people have the choice of multiple news channels, they usually choose Fox News over CNN.
   
2. When people had the choice to tune into liberal radio channel Air America, they chose instead to listen to Rush Limbaugh. Air America went bankrupt.
   
3. When Colorado voters had the opportunity to vote Democrat with mail-in ballots, they chose to vote republican.

While the purpose behind net neutrality is integral to the progressive movement (control and redistribution of internet), it may backfire on the liberals. We just want to make them aware of this possibility.

To prevent the conservatives winning yet another consumer battle, we suggest that the government pro-actively throttle conservative websites more but charge them the same (use Chinese government as a model.)

Why should any company charge more for using more? Everyone should pay the same equal price, no matter how much they use. If you eat less food you should pay the same amount as someone who eats more food. If you use less internet you should pay the same amount as someone who uses more internet. It's only fair.

Surprisingly, many conservatives and liberals are in a rare agreement over net neutrality, but for different reasons. Here are two opposing viewpoints from proponents of net neutrality:

1. A citizen net neutrality advocate: "Without net neutrality, ISPs can charge us more money to visit Gmail or Facebook. We need to be protected from predatory ISPs."
   
2. A Democrat politician: "Without net neutrality, the government can't force ISPs to restrict access to hate websites (like the Drudge Report.) We need to protect you from predatory information."

The position we progressives closest identify with is that of the Democrat politician who wants to stifle access to information.

There is debate whether net neutrality means government regulation of access or content. The truth is, nobody knows. We have to pass net neutrality to find out what's in it.

Allowing the government to control the internet to prevent companies from charging for Facebook seems about as overboard as blowtorching your house to kill a spider. Comcast hasn't yet charged extra for Facebook, so it could be argued that they probably won't. But we have to use scare tactics with years-old issues in order to convince people of the benefits of government control.

When government controls entire industries, great things happen.

Government control has so far worked splendidly with Obamacare. A few people had issues with their health insurance, so the government took over health insurance and made problems for everyone. As long as everyone is equal, it doesn't matter if there are more problems than before.

In a free-market system, when a corporation does something that customers don't like, the customers find another seller or innovate with a new product. In our progressive closed-market system, there is no need for innovation.

Why should fast internet even exist if only the rich can get it? This is why we support slow internet for all, and internet innovation resources to be directed elsewhere (such as entitlement programs.)

We also support government regulation of content, so that there are less (if any) conservative hate websites. In our system, there is only one opinion.

Support net neutrality. Throttle innovation - for the greater good!

This makes complete sense to me. As an employee of the large broadband companies and an installer of the products, I often hear customers complaining that they are paying too much for their superfast service. I certainly think they would be much happier paying too much for service that is slower than the USPS.

Think of what a boon to the postal service this could be, also.

I fully support it!

Although the mention of "neutering" makes me shudder (this is what "neutrality" means, no?), I am all in favor of neutering Internet access. Dear Leader knows best what is best for us, and Dear Leaderess knows best how much of it we should have access to. If the State says this is fair, then it is fair. After all, did not the three Weird Sisters in Macbeth inform us of the Party dictum that "Fair is foul and foul is fair"?

Because human freedom is dangerous and needs to be heavily controlled and regulated by your betters or else people won't be free.

RedDiaperette wrote:Although the mention of "neutering" makes me shudder (this is what "neutrality" means, no?), I am all in favor of neutering Internet access. Dear Leader knows best what is best for us, and Dear Leaderess knows best how much of it we should have access to. If the State says this is fair, then it is fair. After all, did not the three Weird Sisters in Macbeth inform us of the Party dictum that "Fair is foul and foul is fair"?

And there's this, Comrade Diaperette:

I will not yield,

To kiss the ground before young Malcolm's feet,

And to be baited with the rabble's curse.
Though Birnam wood be come to Dunsinane,
And thou opposed, being of no woman born,
Yet I will try the last. Before my body
I throw my warlike shield.
Lay on, Macduff, And damn'd be him that first cries,
'Hold, enough!'

- Macbeth

"The Price of What's Free is ... FREEDOM."

(An admonition for those who never read "terms of service" especially when the service is "free.")

--KOOK

With a big ushanka tip to Comrade Otis:

[img]/images/Stalin_Computer_Net_Neutrality.jpg[/img]

Here, I thought I'd make a different version: NYET NEUTRALITY

[img]/images/Stalin_Computer_Nyet_Neutrality.jpg[/img]

But of course, comrades! We cannot trust those fanatical corporately-funded right-wingers who believe in such ludicrous ideas as the "free market" and "freedom of speech." We all know what kind of speech they utilize, and it sure ain't "FREE SPEECH"!!

Comrade Otis wrote:Because human freedom is dangerous and needs to be heavily controlled and regulated by your betters or else people won't be free.

Yeah! They're fighting for our freedom, those betters of ours! God bless 'em. They've sacrificed so much.

I, for one, welcome the return of the days of 28.8 speeds, comrades; its sounds were like a siren, lulling men to creatures of beauty.



And like the sirens, I see absolutely nothing wrong with heading into their direction.


вперед!

Comrades! Comrades, comrades. You have this all backwards. We will not end up with slower speeds. That is not the purpose, at all. No. No.

We will all have premium service, just like your local businesses, at premium prices, for The Rich™, and subsidized service, for The Poor™.

Everyone will be equally satisfied with their service, just like the Affordable Care Act has allowed with health insurance.

If you like your ISP, you can keep your ISP.

If you like your super high speed broadband service, you can keep your super high speed service.

Let me be clear. This is about fundamentally changing the way that businesses do business and making it Fairer™ for everyone.

This is not about Freedom™. This is about Fairness™.

Al Gore built that...

Just a couple of additions to an unsurpassably equal idea. We know the dangers of original thought and I am avoiding it at all costs.

[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]
I already have slower speeds with AT&T. I often get pop-up windows telling me that the websites are not responding, with a button I must click to "Force Reload."

This started after we eliminated our television service, $70/mo. for unrelenting unhinged, apoplectic hateful crap!

The speed varies daily. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's awful, so you can't tell where it's actually coming from. I think this is intentional.

One thing that really scares me, among so many other things is, once this thing is made into law, they will shut down our beloved People's Cube. They will turn our fun and free speech into "hate speech." They will destroy our family.

We cannot allow this to happen.

Comrade Pamski, net neutrality is a different matter from the free speech regulations they would like to impose. Net neutrality is about how service is delivered not how service is used.

It would be like the government declaring that it is unfair that there are 3 different grades of gasoline and that everybody should have equal access to affordable premium grade gas and that the oil companies will be required to offer the premium gas to everybody at the price of regular gas.

That is, essentially, what Obama is demanding that the broadband providers do - premium service to everybody at the economy price.

This particular intrusion into the market place doesn't involve the 1st Amendment.

Fear Not, dear Pamski, Red Square has this wired...

Behind Tractor Barn #2 near the beet silo is a windmill. (I've sobered up under it frequently)
It has wires on it, and not the kind used to get confessions...its an antenna tuned to Laika. The People's Cube is beamed to Laika, who retransmits to the interwebs to our WiFi and tinfoil hats.
Redundant systems exist for a reason.

Thanks, Comrade Ivan,
I somehow knew that because I know our esteemed Red Square is not stupid and is aware of this threat.
Still, I want to protect him and us. So I decided to mention it.
Thanks for your reassurance, dear Ivan.
It is most appreciated.

Kelly Ivanovna/келя ивановна wrote:

Comrade Otis wrote:Because human freedom is dangerous and needs to be heavily controlled and regulated by your betters or else people won't be free.

Yeah! They're fighting for our freedom, those betters of ours! God bless 'em. They've sacrificed so much.

[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]
I am so sick of politicians telling us how they will fight for us! Such a cliché designed for the deliberately oppressed masses. I recall Shrillary screeching "I will fight for you!" Um, fight for what? They've sacrificed nothing, absolutely nothing. This phrase is just a hijacked metaphor for "I'll screw you for all you're worth!" Vote for me!/sarc

Just supporting your post, dear Kelly.

How wonderful it is when a plan comes together. Everybody has equality and opposition is destroyed!

Oh! Glorious Day.

FORWARD!

Control and regulation of the internet does not involve the 1st amendment yet nyet.

Government control and regulation - what could possibly go wrong?

Comrade, we don't need to ring 1st amendment alarm bells if we just shut down the whole internet in the name of Fairness™. Think how well Healthcare.gov worked and extrapolate that out to the whole of the national broadband network.

It may result in total economic collapse but, with no conservative opposition able to get the message out to propagandize the stupid American voters, who will know?

FORWARD!

Did someone say windmill?

Ivan the Stakhanovets wrote:
Fear Not, dear Pamski, Red Square has this wired...

Behind Tractor Barn #2 near the beet silo is a windmill. (I've sobered up under it frequently)
It has wires on it, and not the kind used to get confessions...its an antenna tuned to Laika. The People's Cube is beamed to Laika, who retransmits to the interwebs to our WiFi and tinfoil hats.
Redundant systems exist for a reason.

Ted Cruz summed it up in a this short video:

"I know that each and every one of you are just as excited as Mrs. Doctor Utopia and I about this development and desperately wish to thank me and the Karl Marx Treatment Center for all of the work we've done to force the internet industry out of the lawless wild west anarchy of it's past. The lawless state of the internet is now over.

We will make the internet run on time!"

Doctor Utopia speaking to students, Feb 13 2015