http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/05/gop-budget-bill-would-kill-net-neutrality-and-fccs-set-top-box-plan/
>House Republicans yesterday released a plan to slash the Federal Communications Commission's budget by $69 million and prevent the FCC from enforcing net neutrality rules, "rate regulation," and its plan to boost competition in the set-top box market.
>THEY FELL FOR THE GOP MEME
>>54739151
Neutrality is a Trojan horse. All content, including advertising, can't be discriminated against.
>>54739151
dont worry, the invisible hand of the free market will solve the problems. government stepping in to something like this would only hurt the consumer, because ISP's have shown time and time again that they will adjust to help out their customers at the cost of their bottom line.
and that 69 million dollars will surely put a huge dent in our debt! you know, the debt that liberals naturally cause 100% of and not republicans by any way at all.
>thinking the FCC has your best interest at heart
Remember when they swore that rule about router power output wasn't to bully router manufacturers into closing off their hardware to open source firmware, then it happened to conveniently do exactly that?
Fuck the FCC, this is good.
>>54739151
where have you been OP
net neutrality is already out of the window with the TPP
>>54739240
>Fuck the FCC, this is good.
Yeah just how abolishing that nasty death tax will really help out those poor folk.
I love when idiots cheer and encourage politicians who actively try and take away anything that could ever potentially help them.
When mitt romney announced to a crowed of poor southerners he would abolish the death tax and then got a round of enormous applause was mind boggling. The death tax only applies to estates worth over $5M USD, so 95% of people in the US will never be effected by it. Yet those retards cheering on "their guy" will never see more than $40,000 a year in their life.
This is just another example
>>54739449
>if it doesn't negatively affect me, it can't be bad!
This is why liberals disgust me. I'm sorry, but "fuck rich people" shouldn't be a guiding principle to your ethos. There's more to a moral legal code than what's best for you, you fucking sociopath.
>>54739561
It's not fuck rich people you dumb cunt, it's call economics, if you have money it is MUCH easier to get more money, that money should be taxed at a higher rate since it is much easier for you to get more of it.
If you have $50M sitting a bank, you make enough money off the INTEREST alone you can live the rest of your days perfectly comfortably without ever spending a dime of that $50M, and if you invest that money even moderately well, average market return on investment will have you making significant chunks of money.
We already know humans are greedy fucks, so is this rich guy making millions a year doing fuckall but letting his money work for him, do you HONESTLY think he is going to stimulate the economy with that money? Nope, he's reinvesting it right back and sitting on it to get more money.
There is a reason we have seen wealth shift DRASTICALLY to the top 0.1% of earners.
64 people, SIXTY FOUR people have more money than the bottom 3.5 BILLION people.
There needs to be some form of wealth distribution and it's obvious even to economists.
>>54739449
Way to not address the part where the FCC are snakes in the grass with a hidden agenda to control mediums of communication in every supposedly beneficial decision they reach.
GUBMINT GUD
>>54739639
Oh I wont deny the FCC can't be trusted, but I believe the FCC is our best chance at keeping the cable industry in check, if I had my way internet would be a public utility in this country. It's retarded they've been allowed to create regional monopolies LEGALLY.
Reminder that Chairman Wheeler was a cable exec.
Someone who was a higher up in cable companies up until a decade ago isn't fighting for you, he doesn't care about your rights, and he has many friends who are still high up in telcom corporations. Who do you think is more relevant to him? You or someone he knows?
>>54739623
>i am entitled to your money!
get fucked, commie.
>>54739658
>I believe the FCC is our best chance at keeping the cable industry in check,
Or you know, if the FCC and all that regulation went away we might see local telcom companies start to pop up again, giving incumbent ISPs actual competition again.
Oh wait that's capitalism which is BAD and REPUBLICAN. Only uneducated people want competition in the marketplace.
>>54739623
>if you have money it is MUCH easier to get more money
This is how I know you're a kid. Because you don't understand capital investment or risk.
>that money should be taxed at a higher rate since it is much easier for you to get more of it
Please provide an ethical reasoning for this beyond "RICH PEOPLES GOT TOO MUCH MONEYS GIB US SUM".
>There is a reason we have seen wealth shift DRASTICALLY to the top 0.1% of earners.
Oh look, it's one of those idiots who think "income inequality" is a bad thing and doesn't understand wealth and economics aren't zero sum. Why don't you go move to Ukraine? Their income is super equal.
>>54739698
How the fuck is that supposed to work? Most cable companies have agreements with your local towns and cities making them the sole provider. The city has agreements saying they wont let anyone else come in and build infrastructure.
So how exactly are these competitors supposed to do anything? The mutli billion dollar companies already own all the lucrative markets and will be VERY aggressive at making sure others can't come in to compete, especially since there will be no regulation on them.
Capitalism never works because humans are greedy cunts at heart and the corporate mentality of quarterly profits are good and ANY negative quarter is TERRIBLE.
>>54739728
>Most cable companies have agreements with your local towns and cities making them the sole provider.
See
>Or you know, if the FCC and all that regulation went away
Are you intentionally obtuse or just illiterate? Your government created the problem, now you want more government to come fix it. Great plan, dipshit.
>>54739760
That's not federal regulation which is what the FCC is. That is local regulation your city/state/town/county etc has enacted without any federal oversight.
>>54739623
>having the government tell you what to do with your money
Must be yuropeen
>>54739773
>all that regulation
Notice the absence of the word federal? State government is just as shitty and protectionist as federal government, they both need to be reigned in.
>>54739793
...okay? So how does getting rid of the FCC do any of that?
Not to mention, with how many people are in this country and the resources we have, we can't have small government, it will never happen and can never happen, stop pretending you live in a fantasy world.
>>54739728
That's unlikely to be true for every city/town/county/etc.
It only takes a few success stories to become bigger news, and if officials start considering the upsides to dumping their contracts with big ISPs it would start happening in more places. Either way, the problem is over regulation. The FCC is regulation, so why would more regulation suddenly start making things better?
>Capitalism never works because humans are greedy cunts
Actually that's exactly why it works.
>the corporate mentality of quarterly profits are good and ANY negative quarter is TERRIBLE.
Yes, why would any company want to be losing money? Little losses over time accumulate into small losses, so you better be trying to figure out how to fix that if you're running a business.
>>54739623
holy shit you're retarded
who do you think builds the 5million dollar home?
what about the billions invested into large commercial buildings.
those don't magically grow from the ground.
its not "easy" to make money when you have money, you have to spend a fucking lot.
you make it seem no one loses from stocks or investments.
>if you have money it is MUCH easier to get more money, that money should be taxed at a higher rate since it is much easier for you to get more of it.
That literally doesn't make any fucking sense
thats like saying i should be taxed more as a software engineer than someone who works at mcdonalds because some would call my job "eaiser".
>>54739820
It gets rid of half the problem, idiot. You're probably too young to know this, but the FCC used to have a pretty reasonable role in the federal government, controlling use of radio spectrum, which is a limited common. Then everyone stopped giving a shit about the radio and over-the-air television and the FCC started muscling its way into cable television and the internet where its regulatory powers weren't ever needed to begin with.
>>54739835
>Yes, why would any company want to be losing money?
Okay let me explain, constant growth is unsustainable, period. You can not have quarterly profits every quarter forever, that isn't possible, the only way you do it is by cutting pay, benefits, or employees.
The minute you can be replaced by robot labor, guess what, that next quarterly statement will look a whole .5% better, your job's now fucked.
Capitalism only works when the workers are real people who you're paying, they then take that paycheck and stimulate the economy. But we're moving to robot workers and capitalism simply wont work in this type of society. The robots aren't spending their hard earned paycheck. and you certainly aren't getting it now that the robot is doing your job.
>>54739685
>>54739685
>>54739707
>>54739789
Who's the 0.1% that's paying all these GOP shills, SRSLY there can't be that many .1%ers in the entirety of the chans combined. Do you guys even make more than 100k let alone 1 million dollars?
>>54739861
>thats like saying i should be taxed more as a software engineer than someone who works at mcdonalds because some would call my job "eaiser".
That's exactly how it works... you make far more as a software engineer and are taxed at a higher rate because of it.
>>54739889
>Do you guys even make more than 100k let alone 1 million dollars?
shhhhh they're just down trodden millionaires, they'll be in the 1% themselves one day. just wait.
>>54739707
>Please provide an ethical reasoning for this beyond "RICH PEOPLES GOT TOO MUCH MONEYS GIB US SUM".
From an utillitarian standpoint, 1M to a billionaire means jack shit but 50k to 20 poor people could mean the world. Isthat ethical enough for you?
>>54739889
>GOP
Fuck the GOP, fuck the Democrats, fuck Obama, fuck the FCC and fuck your little televised sporting event. The fact that you think the GOP is the only enemy shows just how young and naive you really are.
>>54739906
But then he would only have .999 billion D:
You can't buy multiple jumbo jets with only .999 billion. How is he supposed to maintain his life style?
>>54739879
>internet not needing regulation
>only a single provider in most areas
>be me living in the Midwest DSL lands and paying $50 a month
50 cents have been deposited unto your account pajeet
>>54739623
Your story SEEMS logical, but it's LAUGHABLE.
In any real economic sense, if you have any marginal rates above about 25-30% - it is more profitable to offshore, use tax loopholes, and hire lawyers than pay taxes.
You will make your perceived problem WORSE, not better.
How can you "redistribute wealth" WITHOUT force and WITHOUT cost?
>>54739906
>From an utillitarian standpoint, 1M to a billionaire means jack shit but 50k to 20 poor people could mean the world. Isthat ethical enough for you?
No, and you should probably take a philosophy class if you think one person needing something entitles them to take it from someone else. Additionally, you forget that by the very virtue of you being able to post here, you're in the top global 1%. Why don't you send some of your income over to Darfur, if you're so caring. Unless you're only so generous when it comes to other people's money.
>>54739935
>it is more profitable to offshore, use tax loopholes, and hire lawyers than pay taxes.
that's already happening despite tax breaks for the rich.
Not to mention in the 30's and 40's tax rate on the rich was effectively over 80%
>>54739919
Nice projections m8, I was just trying to follow the subject matter
>>54739919
My only enemy is you, cause we don't work together to change shit and instead shit on each other. Fuck you.
>>54739881
>Capitalism only works when the workers are real people who you're paying
this is pretty much true, everyone wants to pretend it isn't but how can capitalism keep up with a robot work force?
>>54739930
>only single provider in most areas
Did you know that's because of local regulations preventing more from existing? Probably not, because you're a dipshit statist.
Less technology
more /pol/
>>54739948
t. jew
>>54739950
Of course, which goes back to the point. LOOK UP the origins of the AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) in 1969. The old tax code was so laughable and so full of holes that many of the top earners paid NO TAX back then, despite a top 94% and later 70% bracket.
>>54739973
>local regulations
yeah so better get rid of all federal regulation to make sure there is nothing stopping them from total take over...
>>54739935
>>54739906
>>54739861
>>54739707
>ITT literally millionaires
>>54739728
Large companies establishing monopolies is not capitalism. Regulation is needed to keep the market free.
>>54740000
>yeah so better get rid of all federal regulation to make sure there is nothing stopping them from total take over...
I don't think you know how competition works.
>>54739930
Are you saying we need MORE regulation from the COMCA...I meant the FCC?
This is so irritating, you are deflecting - Comcast is an establishment liberal corporation - they own MSNBC.
>>54740013
Not yet :^)
Despite the fact 300M+ americans before them didn't get there, they will.
>>54739973
>what are lobbyists for 100 jim
>>54739881
my job is to sit alone in a room with a robot, and program and operate that one robot. 40+ hours a week.
>>54740018
Net neutrality is essential to a free market on the internet. Without it, a few large sites would control everything.
>>54740018
>he doesn't differentiate between natural and unnatural monopolies
Monopolies are absolutely capitalism and they aren't necessarily a bad thing if they result from one company providing the best product or service. A bad monopoly is one that only exists because the government disallows competition in the industry. Like the cable industry. Or the post office.
>>54740013
Having conservative values has nothing to do with personal wealth. Wouldn't expect an ideologue to understand that, though.
>>54740026
Uhhhh, anon if the local towns and governments have already signed away their rights to future development (as many towns, counties, and cities have already done) then the big cable co who signed that deal will take anyone to court who decides to come in and provide your competition, they have legally binding arrangements that say they are the only ones allowed to provide internet/cable access.
And the town/city/county can't just reneg on this agreement either without going to court.
>>54740018
The very opposite. In practice, regulations protect large companies at the expense of new entrants. COMCAST comes to mind - which is why I am happy for internet TV.
>>54739449
>From the South
>Want to defend my region
>Secretly know you're absolutely right and everyone here is a poor retard.
>>54740031
>it's the lobbyists fault the government is bought and paid for, not our supreme overlords for being corrupt pieces of shit willing to sell our government!
Suck that state dick some more.
>retards at Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T successfully kill net neutrality
>Google, Apple, and Microsoft say fuck it, uses their $3 trillion cash pile to build nationwide fiber-to-the-home network
>Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T don't have enough capital to compete with Google and other tech firms
>Comcast goes bankrupt, and Google gets the enjoy being the market monopolist like Comcast wanted
>>54740067
So...regulations are the problem? This has literally been addressed like 10 times in this thread.
>>54740069
It depends on the nature of the regulation. If it's passed with lobbying from large cable companies, you can bet it'll be to their benefit.
>>54739881
>Okay let me explain, constant growth is unsustainable, period.
No duh.
>You can not have quarterly profits every quarter forever, that isn't possible, the only way you do it is by cutting pay, benefits, or employees.
Right. You do have to make sure your business is sustainable over the long term though. To do that you need to mitigate any losses you have though profits or stuff like you said. Plenty of companies have been going for hundreds of years without the need for sustained growth.
>The minute you can be replaced by robot labor, guess what, that next quarterly statement will look a whole .5% better, your job's now fucked.
No it's not, because I work for a company which can't afford automation on that level. This is true for most companies. Ironically the people most at risk right now are people who have no-skill jobs like cashiers. The combination of dying small businesses (who would not be affording automation) and increased cost of labor are both the result of regulation. Looks like there's a pattern forming here.
>Capitalism only works when the workers are real people who you're paying, they then take that paycheck and stimulate the economy.
Again, small businesses keep the money local, and operate on profit margins that wouldn't allow for them to drop a few million dollars on automation, meaning more human jobs. Ironically, by trying to regulate big business so much, we've created an environment hostile to small business, where only established large companies have enough resources to deal with all the regulatory nonsense. The only way many smaller businesses can operate now is to be a part of a franchise, which is pretty scummy in itself.
>>54740097
Of course, that's what tends to happen. "Smart" regulation is almost a unicorn.
>>54740028
>Comcast is an establishment liberal corporation
>they own MSNBC
Actually, Comcast is very Republican and has been for decades.
MSNBC came with NBC Universal when GE sold their media holdings to Comcast.
It's not surprising MSNBC has slowly moved back to center after Comcast acquired it. I wouldn't be surprised it turned into Fox News 2 in a few years.
Only major U.S. media holding company that actually leans liberal is Univision.
>>54740096
....anon what are you going to do about it? It's a legally binding agreement... you can't just up and decide one day, oh well this agreement we made, actually we don't like regulation anymore soooo yeah, anyone can build here now lol, sorry comcast, that was our bad.
Yeah, not gonna fucking happen.
>>54740055
They may develop naturally, but one company having all the power is not good. If they decide to raises prices or cut quality, consumers have no choice but to buy from them.
>>54740060
Holyshit! Good Goyim of the year goes to this guy! Here, enjoy this new pencil holder! Maybe after 30 yes of hard labor you'll get to where I am! By the way, I'm putting my nephew feingold shecklestein as your new senior manager :^) make sure to treat him well, he just graduated!
>>54740107
>small businesses
you know how I can tell you live in the south or the midwest?
Go to any major costal city and point out all those small businesses for me.
>>54740115
>They may develop naturally, but one company having all the power is not good. If they decide to raises prices or cut quality, consumers have no choice but to buy from them.
It's like none of you Bernie Panders idiots understand that without government licensing and regulatory loopholes, you could start your own competing business and undercut the monopoly that just raised the prices.
>>54740080
>sucking big business dick instead
Good goyim! 50 cents have been credited to you account
>>54740112
I said establishment liberal - it's a different term. It's the Starbucks, Twitters, Targets, Googles of the world.
I'm not even using the proper definition of "liberal." I'm using the retarded SJW modern liberal variant.
Just enforce anti trust laws against comms companies, problem solved really
>>54740136
>you know how I can tell you live in the south or the midwest?
Because the liberals haven't killed all our mom and pop shops yet, and we aren't taxed at 45% of our income to line the pockets of useless bureaucrats?
I've never met a masculine white male Democrat voter in my entire life
>>54740136
not the guy you were responding to, but i live in the mid west and people brag about the small town im in because it has a walmart. they dont brag about having small businesses, they brag about wallmart and runnings and bernards
>>54739919
>OBAMAS DOING A BEN GA Z ON MY BALLZ
yeah youre way more rational
>>54740151
>you could start your own competing business and undercut the monopoly that just raised the prices
with what capital? You're talking BILLIONS of dollars. Not to mention, if comcast owns the lines in the area you can't just throw up your own line on their pole and call it a day. You have to lease the rights from them, or build your own infrastructure entirely which requires you to get right of ways, contractors, etc.
You're talking hundereds of billions of dollars for a densely populated state, and far more for the whole country, there is no way for competition to spring up unless someone like google or similar with a LARGE bank roll wanted to get started.
>>54740174
That's because you swear that guy either isn't white because (random retarded reason like tan or face shape) or that he is sissy because he is democrat.
>>54740172
You don't know the difference between federal and state taxes, do you? I only ask because your 45% number seems to point to that.
>>54740152
>he thinks supporting government regulation doesn't help big business
There's a reason why the tobacco companies love the regulations the government put on tobacco products in the 90s. Can you guess why? Because even though it costs them money to pay for bullshit televised propaganda campaigns designed to lower medicare costs, they still make more money because it locks small competitors out of the market. Big business and government are literally two sides of the same coin, you chucklefuck.
>>54740172
>liberals haven't killed all our mom and pop shops yet
yeah because walmart and others are such a bastion of the liberal left.
>>54740192
Get the history straight - most of the lack of competition comes from "regulated" monopolies due to federal legislation. The "break up" of Bell system and ATT came from revoking these similar restrictions.
>>54740136
Are you kidding? Do you own your own home? Did you need to have your water heater fixed? Likely done by a small business. Get Chinese food lately? Likely a small business. Wedding photography? Animal care? Automotive repair? Bought a car? All likely small businesses. You should really stop thinking every business is a multi-billion dollar multi-national with a CEO who makes $10,000 an hour, that's completely wrong.
>>54739897
>That's exactly how it works... you make far more as a software engineer and are taxed at a higher rate because of it.
The key take away is that with a tiered tax system, like the US has, that software engineer is taxed the same rate on their first 20k as a McDonald's employee would be. Only the income that places them in a higher bracket will see the increases rate. Historically the top tax bracket was as high as 70%+ now this is in the 30s.
Then you have capital gains capped at 15%. Doctors who make 200,000 are actually taxed at a higher rate than people who make millions from investments. As a sysadmin I paid a higher tax rate than Romney and I'm sure Trump if he ever releases.
IRAs and 401ks are not a joke - fucking start that shit asap or work till your dead.
It boils down to conservatives think regulation has caused the problems (and it has but only because our politicians are oligarchs and owned by the big businesses taking advantage of the regulation)
Liberals think there needs to be a lot more regulation to stop big businesses from having as much influence on the oligarchs.
No regulation is stupid and the current political elite will never allow enough regulation to keep them in check. Both sides are wrong.
>>54740130
You haven't disputed his point though
>>54740192
>with what capital? You're talking BILLIONS of dollars. Not to mention, if comcast owns the lines in the area you can't just throw up your own line on their pole and call it a day. You have to lease the rights from them, or build your own infrastructure entirely which requires you to get right of ways, contractors, etc.
You realize that there's more than one cable company, right? Maybe if they were allowed to serve the same area, rather than the government limiting it to just one, they'd have to fight for your business or something.
>>54740217
Liberals hate Walmart, which is why they pass laws which hurt small businesses and bring them more business, right? Get a clue, Walmart fucking loves the Clintons.
>Unironically arguing against net neutrality on /g/
I want /r/The_Donald to leave
>>54740264
>rather than the government limiting it to just one
Oh you mean the companies who collude amongst themselves? They specifically coordinate it so they don't overlap and have to compete with each other if you think its because of government regulation and not the businesses wanting it that way for themselves I cant help you.
>>54740244
Capital gains is only capped if you hold a security longer than one year. Also, it initially comes from discretionary income earned at normal income tax rates anyway, which can reach a 50% marginal rate depending on the state.
>>54740192
You realize back in the 2000s there were lots of local ISPs starting up, right? Even fucking Family Video had their own ISP at one point.
MVNOs also exist, which is basically the cellular version of leasing lines.
No one is talking about some new ISPs taking over the entire country, it'd be local/regional ISPs providing better service because they only have to focus on a small area. They don't exist though because of regulations both at federal and local levels.
If your daddy voted red and you're voting red you're most likely just mirroring your upbringing and haven't actually put much original thought into your political positions.
>>54739240
>Freetards can't make good firmware
>Muh gubmint :-(
>>54740296
>Oh you mean the companies who collude amongst themselves? They specifically coordinate it so they don't overlap and have to compete with each other if you think its because of government regulation and not the businesses wanting it that way for themselves I cant help you.
And what happens if one of them breaks rank from the collusion? They make way more money and snipe business from all the other companies. But clearly big business cares more about being evil cartoon villains than profit, so that would never happen.
>>54740303
Leftards are leftarded. They don't even know history of the "regulated monopolies" of the telephone companies to understand that monopolies come from government most of the time, probably about 80-90%.
>>54740308
t. enlightened college liberal
>>54740308
If your daddy voted red and you're voting blue you're most likely just rebelling against your upbringing and haven't actually put much original thought into your political positions.
>>54740136
I'm guessing you don't leave the basement much or else you'd encounter plumbers, electricians, home improvement contractors, food trucks, bakeries, dry cleaners, locally owned coffee shops and grocery stores and restaurants, etc.
>>54740308
Fuck most colleges, I want to see "more smart regulations" for these dishonest shits.
>>54740330
AT&T was a REGULATED monopoly, ding-dong. The word "REGULATED" appears in the fucking term.
>>54740328
With actual competition we would get internet pricing like europe and asia, $20/month for 1gbps.
But that's actual competition and it would require comcast and others to invest in their infrastructure regularly to keep it robust.
However if they wanted to do that they could have done so already, they've proven time and again they dont give a fuck about the customers as long as they keep turning quarterly profits.
>>54740159
"Progressive" I think might be more descriptive than "liberal"
>>54740362
??? of course, you are just repeating what I said.
>>54740366
No fucking way once you consider the sheer size of the network needed to cover every location in 10m sq km.
>republitards want to control the monetization of the Internet by going Orwellian at it, for money
>democraturds want to control the flow of information on the Internet by going Orwellian at it, because society needs hugbox safespace baby carriages and milk bottles so they can feel comfortable and emotionally "unoppressed"
What a time to live in. What a fucking time to live in.
>>54740362
Everything is okay as long as a business is regulated. We cannot allow a business to be unregulated, that's evil and misogynistic.
E.g. Austin TX and killing ridesharing
>>54740390
He just sees the word "regulated" and thinks there must not be a problem.
>>54740406
That's why you should vote Trump.
>>54740412
You do understand why Austin's citizens voted yes on that initiative, correct?
Nice /pol/ meme, by the way.
>>54740402
I live in one of the smallest states in the country with over 5 million residents and I can't get 100mbps for less than $70 a month.
If they wanted to they could have 10gbps fiber laid here a half decade ago. They already have fiber runs, it's far less work to upgrade infrastructure than it is to build new infrastructure. And yet here we are in 2016, still making up excuses for why we shouldnt just buy out these companies and create a 100% public owned nationwide fiber network.
>>54740406
""""""Small government""""""
>>54740424
>Voting for someone who wants to close the Internet and deport people at will
>Not Orwellian
Can one of you faggots tell me what "Net Neutrality", in the form it was passed, actually DID?
Concrete examples please.
>>54740402
Why do ISPs have to cover an entire nation? Do you know what exchanges are? You realize local ISPs already exist in some places, even in the US, right?
>>54740418
Confirmed for not understanding how the old Bell System worked.
i have all but quit the internet b/c it's shit
good riddance
>>54740449
You mean government owned. I would NOT be free to sell my shares.
>>54740459
>Voting for someone who wants to close the Internet and deport people at will
It would help if you were actually informed on issues before talking about them. You don't even need to be an expert, just read a fucking article every now and then instead of reading headlines.
>>54740459
Deporting illegal aliens? Good heavens
>>54740470
Because the Democrats convinced them cable companies would start packaging the internet like television, and this somehow wouldn't piss off even normies after one Google search.
>>54740494
Read before you accuse others of being poorly read. It makes you look silly.
http://time.com/4150891/republican-debate-donald-trump-internet/
>>54740504
>What is due process?
>>54740436
I live in Austin, and a majority voted "no" so I am guessing you didn't quite understand it either.
Prop 1 was a proposal to repeal some ridesharing regulations. Austin is primarily "progressive" and repealing regulation is a cardinal sin. Uber and Lyft were mandated to have 25% of their drivers fingerprinted by May 1st, after Prop 1 failed they did not meet that requirement so they left the market.
Now in their absence, City of Austin is allowing small ridesharing companies to operate in violation of the imposed regulations, directly contradicting the "safety" narrative many pushed.
>>54740485
Yeah far better to keep comcast and verizon in control, they've had record profits for the past decade and have reinvested almost nothing into infrastructure improvements.
Hell Verizon stole several billion dollars for fiber upgrades they were supposed to make but never did, government didn't do shit, didn't ask for the money back, just said, oh well. So why the fuck should I not want it 100% government owned? At least then we can force the profits to be returned back into the infrastructure to keep improving it over time unlike the fucking companies who are supposed to be doing that in the first place.
>>54740424
I'm not an Amerifat, but i can see why one would vote Trump.
Hillary is more in line with the corporate monetization shit i mentioned on the republitard spectrum,
and if she gains power she will have support by the powers within and behind congress that dictate the sway of voting.
On the other hand, Trump is a clown nobody supports and even if he gets the presidency, he will be allowed nothing and will do nothing. It will basically prove that the presidency by itself is worthless in USA unless you have the backing of the powers that have been in the upper political echelon for decades (without this cycle shit).
Or at least that's my pseudo-intellectual observation.
>>54740478
>he thinks Ma Bell was a natural monopoly
http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/1994/11/cj14n2-6.pdf
>>54740504
He'd deport the legal ones too if they were originally Mexican and he thought he could get away with it. he doesn't give a fuck.
>>54739658
>public utility
That would force a monopoly.
Don't worry, Donald Trump has our back, he'll fix this.
>>54740527
Who wants to bypass due process? Not Trump, so I think you may be confused.
>>54740555
Progtards don't understand that government is literally the biggest monopoly there is. Don't bother trying to convince them.
>>54740530
Comcast and Verizon are beginning to act more and more like government bureaucracies because they ARE. Through legislation, they are putting back together the old Bell system that was dismantled in the late 70's.
Your solution is worse, nationalization.
>>54740555
I'm okay with government run as long as there is proper oversight. The big problem is half our current government is owned by big business and it will never happen.
I think there needs to be extreme government regulation, I just dont think the current government can be entrusted to do it and I dont think there is a solution that is within our current governments ability to do. I think at some point we may find another revolution, though I think it would be spurred by robot labor more than anything else.
>>54740553
They can't just kick you out if you can prove you're legal here. Stop making up lies you fucking cuck.
>>54740553
>Would
You're the worst mind reader I've ever seen
>>54740552
>Cato Institute
Whatever, I'll humor you anyway.
The only real competitors were GTE and MCI, both of which were regional. Ma Bell was responsible for implementing telephone infrastructure in godforsaken places like Jesusburg, WV and Christtown, IA.
>>54740494
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/#5a15f81d4398
http://fortune.com/2015/12/08/donald-trump-bill-gates-internet/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/donald-trump-wants-to-ban-the-internet-will-ask-bill-gates-to-close-it-up-a6764396.html
>>54740531
Plenty of people support Trump, even politicians and policymakers.
You realize Trump has an entire book on his policies, right? Stop reading headlines, that's not information.
>>54740594
nationalization with the current political elite would suck sure, I dont think our current politicians are the ones who should be making the decisions, they've already proven they're oligarchs owned by the corporate interests.
>>54740582
>DEPORT THEM AND BAN MUSLIMS FROM RENTERING WITHOUT A TRIAL
>Not a violation of due process
The GOP's war on education worked, it seems.
>>54740609
The history is that it is difficult to find a sustained monopoly WITHOUT government privilege.
>>54740597
>I think there needs to be extreme government regulation, I just dont think the current government can be entrusted to do it and I dont think there is a solution that is within our current governments ability to do. I think at some point we may find another revolution, though I think it would be spurred by robot labor more than anything else.
We just have to get the right guys in there, and everything will be okay! TOP MEN!
>>54740599
I said he would IF he could, not that he can or he will.
Tell me honestly if you think he legally could get away with it he wouldnt.
>>54740639
Nice source, shill! Totally voting Clinton now
>>54740610
>Bloomberg
Shalom!
>>54740610
Even Snopes thinks the idea that Trump wants to shut down the Internet and ban all muslims is bullshit. Yeah, THAT Snopes.
http://www.snopes.com/trump-wants-shut-internet/
Hell, you could probably find the videos where he said this stuff easily enough. Ever notice how news articles only like to take partial quotes?
Just look at this mess.
> The presidential hopeful said that “We’ve got to maybe do something with the internet,” because it was being used to radicalise people. He said that he would “see Bill Gates” so that he could look into “closing it up”.
Get more informed. Seriously.
>>54740645
well minimally i'd like men who aren't getting huge donations for forcing through corporate created legislation.
Ideally i'd like to get rid of money in politics all together as it's obviously corrupting our politicians.
>>54740611
Name it nigga
>>54740647
More leftist lies. All lies. Trump would never abuse the system.
>he fell for the "capitalism drives technological progress" meme
>>54740647
Would, could, if. This is why our government has checks and balances, you fucking moron. I'll bet Obama would execute all Republicans if he could get away with it too.
What an idiotic thought experiment.
>>54740687
I never understood this "getting money out of politics." The GOVERNMENT prints the money.
"Public financing" of elections simply gets you EU style corporatism.
>>54740689
>Trump would never abuse the system
Which system? he's already got a proven track record of abusing the bankruptcy laws.
>>54740688
>>54740687
>well minimally i'd like men who aren't getting huge donations for forcing through corporate created legislation.
So that they can start getting theirs? That's a pretty good wealth redistribution plan, get us all some of that lobbying money.
All men are corruptible. People are shit. The best we can do is limit the power of government to prevent such corruptions from being possible in the first place.
>>54740639
Non-citizens do not have the right to due process.
Like it matters anyway, anyone regardless of citizenship can be held indefinitely without charge, as signed into law by President Obama every year since 2012 through the NDAA.
It wasn't a big deal because Obama pinky promised he'd never use it, but I wonder what you think about it now that Trump will have this power.
>>54740406
Someone should have slapped Steve Jobs when he came up with the iphone.
>>54740733
at least you ignored the entire line that addressed your point
>Ideally i'd like to get rid of money in politics all together as it's obviously corrupting our politicians
>>54740720
You know what I appreciate about Trump? he is HONEST that he tries to pay as little taxes as possible - like everyone else. I also appreciate his position to eliminate as many deductions to the tax code as possible. High earners find ways around taxes through areas such as deductions.
>>54740744
All I wanted in highschool was something like an Oqo that wasn't shit. Why did we move towards locked down pieces of shit like smartphones?
I really hope trump brings back public executions.
Capitalism drives material and infrastructural buildup and it is great for this.
It fucks up though when the monetary focus on production ends up fucking up and wasting resources and fucking up with long-term societal survival plans (based on some important scarce resources),
and when unregulated corporations start playing like Intel for monetary gain and going slow-mo due to monopoly.
We won't be colonizing other planets and mining asteroids to compensate for that resource waste, with capitalism.
There will need to be someone willing to make grave sacrifices of monetary nature, as well as a great resource buildup and regulation, in order to create and establish those fucking ships and transportation routes.
>>54740746
How exactly do you propose to get rid of money in politics, that won't result in a bunch of backroom deals and shell companies?
"Getting money out of politics" is just another useless liberal talking point that isn't worth discussing because it isn't achievable without getting money out of everywhere else.
>>54740772
The problem is i doubt he will reign in his follow 1%ers. Why should he? It would just make him their target next.
If trump gets elected it will be more of the same shit but with a yelling assclown as our mascot and a wall that will go 1000% overbudget while taking 3x longer than it needs to and lining the pockets of every contractor and sub contractor from texas to California.
>>54740799
The federal government doesn't even execute people any more. The others are state by state.
>>54740786
Better question is why haven't you made it yet? It's like you don't think kickstarter exists/
>>54740811
You're trying to fix a broken system, i'm trying to envision a working system.
I freely admit what I propose would never pass the current government, I just dont think our current government is legitimate.
>>54740746
The government is now entirely occupational, any attempt to get money out of politics would involve massive changes to the system which would intentionally be perceived as an attack, you terrorist.
>>54740817
Tell me that the alternative is better, please.
Please
>>54740847
yup i know
>>54740842
>>54740817
It's worth a shot. There are as many wealth wealthy leftists in that 1% as not. They're the same people like Stephen King who BEGGED Obama to "raise" his taxes. THAT'S a dishonest asshat.
He could pay more taxes TODAY by simply taking the standard deduction and NOT itemizing!
>>54740842
You didn't answer my question. How do you construct a government immune to corruption via money without limiting the power government has to be corrupted? I'm not asking you to fix the current system, I'd be satisfied with a realistic model of your mental utopia.
>>54740847
How the HELL you get money out of politics when the TREASURY PRINTS THE MONEY?
>>54740698
This. I don't know how this is still a meme after all these years.
There are so many things universally considered good that can drive and motivate humans towards something, like love of family, love of God, love of country, love of truth, love of knowledge, etc. Capitalism is the system that picked the one universally considered immoral thing to drive human actions: love of money. And there are people who still defend it!
>>54740891
The Federal Reserve is a private corporation.
>>54739948
>global 1%
It sure feels like the global 1%. A lot of us here in the US are a paycheck or two from being in the street. But don't worry, all that money will trickle down someday!
>>54740531
your argument against trump is retarded. Youre just making assumptions have no idea what youre talking about. Leftists always either say trump is literally hitler or a clown. They don't have an actual argument.
>>54740902
>created by the government
>has a .gov domain
>people still fall for the "durr the federal reserve is private" meme
Off yourself.
>>54740900
Leftists have systematically dismantled all of the other unifying structures you mentioned. Oh well, this is all we've got.
>>54740902
The Federal Reserve system "regulates" the banking industry, and primarily sets a short term rate target by buying and selling government bonds.
Congress has DELEGATED that role to that bank. It is as "private" as the post office in reality.
>>54740900
Capitalism picked the motivating factor that worked. Human selfishness. Just because you're bothered by the natural motivations we evolved to have since we lived in trees and threw shit at each other doesn't make them stop existing. If people could be motivated by any of that shit, one of the many attempts at a communist utopia would have succeeded by now, but instead they've all been hijacked by human greed. Because not believing in something doesn't make it not so.
>>54739948
>Take a philosophy class
>Le Rawls strawman
I see that you struggled with your 100-level ethics class.
>>54740909
You're still the global 1%. Stop being a greedy asshole and share your wealth with people who need it more. Turn your internet off and send the money to the Middle East.
>>54740639
When you're not a citizen you do not have the rights entitled to a citizen. I don't get why this concept is so hard for people to understand.
>>54740909
You have made the cardinal mistake of solely looking at money in nominal, rather than REAL terms. ANY system that will radically "redistribute" wealth will destroy the value of that money.
>>54740891
So maybe we should go back to the gold standard? Wouldn't the government just assert their control over currency anyway?
>Franklin D. Roosevelt illegalizes the ownership of gold, forcing citizens and companies to surrender their gold to the government
>Nixon suspends convertibility, USD no longer gold backed
Oh, we've done this before.
>>54740946
>le capitalism works maymay
I hope you enjoy all the Pajeets capitalism is bringing in to replace you for less than minimum wage.
If you love capitalism so much, if capitalism is so right, then why aren't you working 16 hours a day in a factory alongside your wife and kids for 1 dollar a day?
>>54740933
>>54740942
>The Treasury prints the money
The Treasury != The Federal Reserve was my point, dipshits.
>>54740977
The standard of money regulation doesn't mean much - it's how much government spends.
>>54740966
"Illegal immigrants" are counted as workers or migrants in most states, and are this protected by laws that protect citizens.
>>54740900
Just how communism works for the love of country in North Korea and Soviet Russia! Look how far ahead North Korea is! Look how beautiful Russia is today!
>>54740946
>Just because you're bothered by the natural motivations we evolved to have since we lived in trees and threw shit at each other
Wrong. The concept of greed and private ownership didn't show up for thousands of years. Many early human tribes were communes where things were shared equally. Mercantilism and agriculture are when private ownership started to be common.
>>54740980
> le capitalism = globalism maymay
>>54741016
Russia was decimated by the Putin and Yeltsin years.
North Korea is a strawman, and isn't communist.
Try again.
>>54740980
>If you love capitalism so much, if capitalism is so right, then why aren't you working 16 hours a day in a factory alongside your wife and kids for 1 dollar a day?
Because the laws of supply and demand have determined that my work is of higher value than that? The only people who need government regulation to make $7.25 an hour are those whose skillsets are so common and useless that the labor market doesn't value it that high. As a result, we have states like New Jersey and Oregon where it's illegal to pump your own gas, just to keep the jobs the other 48 states lost when they instituted a federal minimum wage.
>>54740946
Capitalism doesn't work because people are greedy. Capitalism works because people get to be free. Human greed is the worst point of capitalism.
>>54740946
>>54741016
>someone is pointing out capitalism's obvious flaws
>quick, mention communism! that ought to distract them!
If you guys were right, then why would you need to use cheap debate tricks like red herrings and false dilemma fallacies?
>>54741019
Classical Liberalism doesn't exclude communes - it just doesn't allow forceful association.
>>54741019
Is this what people are being taught now?
jfc
>>54741028
>le no true communist fallacy
There's a reason there's never been a "real" communist country. You're probably still too stupid to figure it out though.
>>54741029
>there are people in this blog right now who unironically believe in outdated supply and demand economics
Pic related, enjoy being replaced by him.
>>54741056
You're right; there haven't been any true Communist countries.
Why use Communism as a red herring, then?
>>54741037
Because many leftists are not in it for a good faith argument - they are in it for shutdowns. Why argue in good faith when your opponent is a liar?
>>54741019
>Many early human tribes were communes where things were shared equally.
And what happened when two of those communes existed in the same space with limited resources?
Is this actually the shit they fill your heads with in liberal arts schools now?
>>54740980
US and japan are are hugely capitalist and two of the richest nations in the world. How does that not work? How are you so delusional that you look at the countries with the highest GDP in the world and say that it doesn't work?
>>54740786
>what is a Nexus
>>54741029
>The only people who need government regulation to make $7.25 an hour are those whose skillsets are so common and useless that the labor market doesn't value it that high
and so we as the betters of society get to decide to just let them die off in their own filth?
Sounds like a great way to get civil unrest.
Good thing class warefar isn't a thing in the US.
>>54741036
>people get to be free in capitalism
Holy shit! I Don't Know Shit About History: The Post!
>>54741073
>I need a safe space!
Conservatards are like a real-life Tumblr.>>54741073
>>54741045
Communes are unsustainable for the lifestyles we have now anyway. But it's wrong to say greediness is a natural human instinct when humans universally shared amongst themselves in our earliest years.
>>54741053
I got that information from the opening chapters in "The Story of Civilization" by Will Durant, published in 1934. You know, back when communism was relevant and scary. Do you really think many people were sympathetic to communists back then?
>>54741061
>outdated supply and demand economics
Today I went into a hipster coffee shop and saw a cup of six to eight green grapes being sold for $3, no joke.
Would you buy them? Why or why not?
>>54741072
Because it's unachievable due to its willful ignorance of human nature, just like half the harebrained ideas ITT.
>>54741061
There is a cost to mercantilism. Fundamentally, all the laws of supply and demand demonstrate is the price given voluntary association and property rights.
This is not outdated at all - it's like saying C computing language is outdated because you can't make GUIs - it's ABSURD.
>>54741092
Look at all these free children, anon.
It's the free market fixing things! Why don't you have more faith in the free market god?
>>54741109
>human nature
You are aware that humans are shaped by their environments, correct?
>>54741089
>and so we as the betters of society get to decide to just let them die off in their own filth?
I'm not deciding it, I'm just refusing to subsidize their existence. Why do you think you're entitled to someone else's resources just because you're a dumbshit who can't get any yourself?
Die out like the rest of the animals that couldn't adapt, scrub.
>>54741092
They do get to be free in our edition of capitalism that works. The most free they have ever been save for tribal. Capitalism works thanks to freedom.
>>54741092
Most of that is irrelevant in the US today though
>>54741081
Resources. Do you think they thought of the land as "their" land and "their" resources? They thought of nature as nature. It was as absurd to them to say you owned some land was it was for someone to say they own the ocean. It was something everything was free to utilize. Of course there was trade and wars amongst the tribes, but don't think that means they were fighting over property.
>Is this actually the shit they fill your heads with in liberal arts schools now?
Maybe you should go read a book. By the way, the book I used is from 1934, so stop trying to cop out your lack of knowledge by writing it off as liberal nonsense.
>>54741092
Capitalism properly defined, is VOLUNTARY COOPERATION and PROPERTY RIGHTS you marxist turd.
>>54741121
You're aware that humans aren't the only animals without instincts whose development extends to before their physical birth, right? Good luck fighting millenia of evolution to achieve your feel-good utopia, I'm sure it will work this time.
>>54741135
>Why do you think you're entitled to someone else's resources just because you're a dumbshit who can't get any yourself?
Because i will take it from you otherwise. I wont go quietly because you've decided i'm not worth the value of food or shelter.
I wasn't kidding about civil unrest, if you do this to enough people at the same time you WILL have problems.
>>54741082
Japan is literally dying right now with asymptotically null birth rates, and America is turning into Mexico 2.0. But tell me more about how those two states are the next best thing since sliced bread.
>>54741155
>they were fighting over property
Well they DID bring the women back with them after slaughtering the other tribe.
>>54741153
Thanks to social reforms.
>>54741174
We can be like Denmark, be a good fool, EAT your 50% tax wedge and 9 dollar big mac.
What you are really saying is you want to be put in prison.
>>54741155
>he actually fell for the Noble Savage myth
Yeah, sorry, but that's absolute horseshit. Territory has been a thing since the dawn of time and it's not limited to people.
>>54741170
Capitalism in its present form has only existed for roughly 70 years.
One who is taught to share will share. Don't get too triggered by those with a different opinion in the current year, JT. :-)
>>54741028
You're so delusional
Leftists always try to say that communist countries arent really communist because true communism is impossible. Then they disregard every failure of communism to say that it is not evidence that communism is shit.
>>54741170
>Good luck fighting millenia of evolution
Millenia of evolution tells us it's cool to eat all that sugar and die of diabetes while getting fatter and fatter. Evolution isn't fast enough to catch up to contemporary times.
>>54741197
>What you are really saying is you want to be put in prison.
Do you see an alternative? Either we lock up those too poor to provide for themselves and provide for them while making them do some manual labor to help offset the costs, or we just start killing people off in order to save resources.
>>54741174
Then I'll put it all off-shore or in crypto-currencies. I'll work under the table, or maybe just start working less hard and making less money. Or maybe I'll go on welfare and take someone else's money, until there are no more someone elses left.
The government doesn't have nearly as much control over the economy as you think they do.
>>54741179
Those things are seperate issues that have nothing to do with economics.
>>54741213
>Implying I'm even a leftist.
Russia is a shithole, and you'd be hard-pressed to find any politically-literate person who thinks North Korea is a communist country. Juche itself is described as non-communist.
>>54741222
Then you don't understand economics. Markets are connected - in places with high minimum wages in real economic terms also have high costs of living - there is no way around this short of prison.
You have a false dilemma, in places like Hong Kong, you can earn very fast to eat a big mac.
>>54741210
Capitalism has existed for as long as one guy had something someone else wanted, and that someone else had something to offer as a trade. That you think capitalism is something that requires anything but a lack of a third party saying "no you can't do that, that's not fair" is frankly a terrifying indicator of the state of the current education system.
anti net-neutrality shills need to fuck off back to their containment board
>>54741251
Economically, the government owns practically everything. Of course, on paper, everybody owns "everything." That's communism in reality versus fantasy.
>>54741277
>Capitalism has existed for as long as one guy had something someone else wanted,
This is so incorrect that it's not even worth debating further.
>muh current year education
You showed me!
>>54741263
>in places with high minimum wages in real economic terms also have high costs of living
Living wage where I am is $14.50/hour on a 40 hour week for a single person and no dependents.
Minimum wage? $8.25/hour
You can't live here and work here without two jobs.
>>54741204
Territory isn't property. Do you think a wolf has any property? How about a spider? They're very territorial creatures, but neither of them have property. Your lineage having ancestral lands doesn't mean you own it. And no, it's not "noble savages", it's logic. Why would private ownership exist at a time where the most important things like food and water were shared equally?
I even mentioned how those concepts started to pop up with agriculture and mercantilism.
>>54741182
They weren't property though, they were just slaves.
>>54741291
Make your posts more coherent and less contradictory, please. You just proved my point.
>>54740308
>If your daddy voted red and you're voting red you're most likely just mirroring your upbringing and haven't actually put much original thought into your political positions.
>>54740348
>If your daddy voted red and you're voting blue you're most likely just rebelling against your upbringing and haven't actually put much original thought into your political positions.
This is called a circle. Because according to these posts no one has any original thought on politics
>>54741296
>You can't live here and work here without two jobs.
Move
>>54741285
Blame Hiro for telling mods to back off.
But hey, they have their total free speech!
>>54741295
>he thinks voluntary trade between two consenting parties is a phenomenon that has only existed for seventy years
Feel free to educate me on how capitalism started in the 1940s, dipshit.
>>54741301
slave
noun
historical
noun: slave; plural noun: slaves
1.
a person who is the legal property of another
>>54741328
>IN ITS CURRENT FORM
I'd need to start on basic language skills before attacking that.
>>54741301
>Your lineage having ancestral lands doesn't mean you own it.
Right, the taxes I pay on that land mean I own it, because you can't truly own anything without the government's blessing, and they're gunna get theirs.
>>54741296
So people will live that way for ever, earning that much? Of course not.
>>54741246
>things don't have consequences or ramifications
You are literally retarded.
>>54741301
>Territory isn't property. Do you think a wolf has any property?
If you're asking if he has a deed from the government granting him exclusive use, no. If you're asking if he has an area of land he lives on and defends from invaders competing for the same resources, yes, absolutely.
Are you seriously arguing species haven't been competing for scarce resources like food and water forever? If so, you should probably get a biologist on the phone and let them in on this data you have that disproves everything we know about how natural selection works.
>>54741354
A government is only allowed to exist by the people they govern
>>54741308
Juche in effect is communist because the government owns everything.
>>54741338
Now you're arguing semantics. What's a better term for someone who was conquered and forced to labor in a time in human history where ownership didn't exist?
>>54741352
Capitalism "in it's current form" is corporatism, so I'm not sure what you're trying to convince me of. We both think big business buying the government is bad, you just think it's the corporations' fault for trying to give them money rather than the government's for taking it.
>>54741402
Until the people have no choice, amirite
>>54741386
Oh boy, you're gonna give me a raise? I'll be sure to tell my boss a stranger on the internet told him he has to pay me more.
>>54741435
If you are going to be stuck doing low skill labor forever, it's your choice, and with very high price floors on labor, it will be lost to automation ANYWAY.
>>54741470
>it's your choice
Lol, yes im sure literally everyone who has ever worked a low skill job made that choice to not get a better job.
If everyone could just get a better job then there wouldnt be poor people.
