FCC To Propose Regulating Internet as a Utility...

[Bowfinger]

We all know damn well that if prices go up under government control the left will just claim it would have gone up that much anyways, just like they did with the ACA.

And they will be right, IF there is a well-established trend of steadily increasing prices, and if the new increases are consistent with that trend ... just as they were with the ACA.

 

[realibrad]

And they will be right, IF there is a well-established trend of steadily increasing prices, and if the new increases are consistent with that trend ... just as they were with the ACA.

So 2 things.

Trends are not causation so just because you have one, does not mean that it explains why after things were change it continued. It simply means nothing either way. So not right inherently.

I responded to your comment on the billionaire thread.

 

[boomerang]

Yep. There will be a $10/month fee added to everybody's bill to make sure inner city welfare moms have access to free internet.

Would that Internet access be from their government supplied smart phones?

 

[glenn1]

And they will be right, IF there is a well-established trend of steadily increasing prices, and if the new increases are consistent with that trend ... just as they were with the ACA.

If prices went down it's because of liberal policy. If prices stay the same it's because liberal policy preferences had to be compromised to pass into law and we need to "close the loopholes." If prices went up, that's evidence liberal policy was too small and even more money needs to be spent on it.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I'm ok with that too. Unfortunately most of the time when we have these taxes. It usually only goes to the poor inner city "youths."

Well, my home does not need to be connected to the internet, it already is. If that money is spent on infrastructure, then a large part of it will end up going out into the countryside where high speed internet is almost completely lacking due to their being little incentive for the large ISPs to build out to a place that has few customers.

Ideally I would like to see is the federal government directly build out the infrastructure and not just give money to the major ISPs to do it since that has not worked too well in the past.

 

[piasabird]

I can see it now. You will need to get a license to be on the internet at $200 a year. They will meter all your e-mail and charge you for each one. Just like the phone networks you will pay line fees and about ten other fees that will be another $30 a month. Everything the Government manages turns to Crap. It would be better if they just broke up some of these Mega ISP's. Some competition might help.

One problem is people keep cutting cable and watch TV only on the Internet which is a fine idea. So people on the Internet are paying for all the losses these cable TV companies have due to low number of subscriptions. One reason it probably costs more is the Government makes ISP's keep all the E-mails too long. I don't think they should have to keep any of the E-Mail. Look at the IRS. They lost E-mail and nothing happened to them. All I can say is you cant fix stupid.

I am using AT&T DSL 3rd tier at the present time and it is working fine. I don't like the cost, but cell phone rates are higher also. Maybe the government should start auditing all these operations.

 

[piasabird]

The FCC regulates phones. When was the last time your phone service became cheaper?

 

[nickqt]

I can see it now. You will need to get a license to be on the internet at $200 a year. They will meter all your e-mail and charge you for each one. Just like the phone networks you will pay line fees and about ten other fees that will be another $30 a month. Everything the Government manages turns to Crap. It would be better if they just broke up some of these Mega ISP's. Some competition might help.

One problem is people keep cutting cable and watch TV only on the Internet which is a fine idea. So people on the Internet are paying for all the losses these cable TV companies have due to low number of subscriptions. One reason it probably costs more is the Government makes ISP's keep all the E-mails too long. I don't think they should have to keep any of the E-Mail. Look at the IRS. They lost E-mail and nothing happened to them. All I can say is you cant fix stupid.

I am using AT&T DSL 3rd tier at the present time and it is working fine. I don't like the cost, but cell phone rates are higher also. Maybe the government should start auditing all these operations.

My phone fees are under $70 with an iphone, I just don't treat it like a gameboy. My fees haven't gone up in over 6 years.

Big bad gub'mint regulations haven't done anything. It's AT&T et. al that up the prices.

 

[Bowfinger]

So 2 things.

Trends are not causation so just because you have one, does not mean that it explains why after things were change it continued. It simply means nothing either way. So not right inherently. ...

Yes, agreed. I should have said "They are likely right ..." The real world is never so black and white; there is never only one variable.

 

[Bowfinger]

If prices went down it's because of liberal policy. If prices stay the same it's because liberal policy preferences had to be compromised to pass into law and we need to "close the loopholes." If prices went up, that's evidence liberal policy was too small and even more money needs to be spent on it.

Yawn. You continue your habit of posting wholly useless, totally partisan flatulence, Wake us when you're ready to actually address a point directly and with substance.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

My phone fees are under $70 with an iphone, I just don't treat it like a gameboy. My fees haven't gone up in over 6 years.

Big bad gub'mint regulations haven't done anything. It's AT&T et. al that up the prices.

And yet AT&T is not the only choice to be had in the cell phone market. Prices for cell phones services vary widely because there is plenty of competition. So if consumers want lower prices for their internet service they need to push for actions that will actually create competition without imposing additional costs that will be transferred down to them by businesses and which will not limit the number of actors in the market but increase them dramatically.

Lastly the worse thing you could do for the internet in terms of personal freedom and civil liberties is to have government knee deep in managing who gets to compete versus who does not, determining what services can and cannot be offered or creating regulatory bodies with the power to impose their will on service providers when it comes to forcing them to comply with any government action being pushed down the pipeline, simply via the process and ability to restrict or deny licensing or permit renewals, etc within the industry.

Than again maybe some people crave and desire an overlord watching and managing their personal private lives because they can't deal with earth shattering ideas such as personal freedom and the ability to make and live with the consequences of their own choices.

 

[nickqt]

And yet AT&T is not the only choice to be had in the cell phone market. Prices for cell phones services vary widely because there is plenty of competition. So if consumers want lower prices for their internet service they need to push for actions that will actually create competition without imposing additional costs that will be transferred down to them by businesses and which will not limit the number of actors in the market but increase them dramatically.

Lastly the worse thing you could do for the internet in terms of personal freedom and civil liberties is to have government knee deep in managing who gets to compete versus who does not, determining what services can and cannot be offered or creating regulatory bodies with the power to impose their will on service providers when it comes to forcing them to comply with any government action being pushed down the pipeline, simply via the process and ability to restrict or deny licensing or permit renewals, etc within the industry.

Than again maybe some people crave and desire an overlord watching and managing their personal private lives because they can't deal with earth shattering ideas such as personal freedom and the ability to make and live with the consequences of their own choices.

So, you're saying that big bad gub'mint hasn't ruined telephone service even though they regulate it, but if we let big bad gub'mint regulate the internet, everything is going to go to hell.

 

[Blanky]

It is a utility. This must happen.

 

[BoberFett]

I still find it hard to believe that Tom Wheeler, a former phone/cable lobbyist, is pushing for this.

That should probably concern you.

 

[DCal430]

The FCC regulates phones. When was the last time your phone service became cheaper?

Uh no. The FCC regulates traditional landlines, not digital voice or voice over IP. Most so called land lines are now unregulated digital voice or VOIP.

FiOS digital voice and ATT U-Verse Voice are both unregulated. Unlike their traditional landlines.

 

[BoberFett]

There is just no good reason for wired internet service to not be a utility. It is probably more common than wired phone service. And it is a natural monopoly just like phone, electric, water, etc.

Internet service is not a natural monopoly. The last mile may be, but not internet service.

I'm all for municipalities owning the last mile and renting those lines out to ISPs on a per customer basis. Let any company that wants to bring their services into the city's PoP and compete for customers based on offerings of speed, value adds, etc. Want to change companies? Click. Done. Then ISPs are only responsible for maintaining their backbones and trunks into each PoP.

But I don't see anything good happening when the federal government actually regulates internet connections.

 

[Sonikku]

Obamacare for the internet!

 

[Zorba]

Internet service is not a natural monopoly. The last mile may be, but not internet service.

I'm all for municipalities owning the last mile and renting those lines out to ISPs on a per customer basis. Let any company that wants to bring their services into the city's PoP and compete for customers based on offerings of speed, value adds, etc. Want to change companies? Click. Done. Then ISPs are only responsible for maintaining their backbones and trunks into each PoP.

But I don't see anything good happening when the federal government actually regulates internet connections.

Well the way it is setup today, it is a natural monopoly. If the last mile lines became public property or if the ISP were forced to lease those lines to competitors, then competition could easily come in. But I don't see either happening without some sort of utility regulation.

In theory city owned lines is a great idea, in reality they would be laid once and never upgraded and take weeks to get repaired.

 

[Zorba]

Title2 does not mean something is not regulated.
And maybe I am showing my age but long distance calls, collect calls, etc... use to cost a arm and a leg, per minute. Then we had competition that got us the 1800collect, MCI's, etc... and prices came down year after year with more competition. Now many things we had to pay for are included in basic service.

Look at the history of the phone system and how they were able to stifle competition, keep prices high, and control the market.

It seems like you are trying to disagree with me, but everything you said makes my point for me. Which was, even though telephone is regulated, innovations have still occurred and prices for extra services have come way down, especially when adjusted for inflation.

 

[berzerker60]

In theory city owned lines is a great idea, in reality they would be laid once and never upgraded and take weeks to get repaired.

As opposed to the current privately run lines, which once laid never get upgraded and take weeks to get repaired.

 

[Jimzz]

It seems like you are trying to disagree with me, but everything you said makes my point for me. Which was, even though telephone is regulated, innovations have still occurred and prices for extra services have come way down, especially when adjusted for inflation.

No I am agreeing to the degree that the phone system is a great example of title2 and how it can help internet grow as well.

I am happy Wheeler is finally as pissed off as most of the public. He tried to give his former employers a better hand but they kept biting it and well now his hands are tied to what he can do as per what the court has said.

I do not think it will help the end user right away but will in the long run. Look how long it took to break up the bells and give more competition.

 

[BoberFett]

Well the way it is setup today, it is a natural monopoly. If the last mile lines became public property or if the ISP were forced to lease those lines to competitors, then competition could easily come in. But I don't see either happening without some sort of utility regulation.

In theory city owned lines is a great idea, in reality they would be laid once and never upgraded and take weeks to get repaired.

Wait, are you saying the government can't be trusted to give us the best service possible? :hmm:

 

[realibrad]

Well the way it is setup today, it is a natural monopoly. If the last mile lines became public property or if the ISP were forced to lease those lines to competitors, then competition could easily come in. But I don't see either happening without some sort of utility regulation.

In theory city owned lines is a great idea, in reality they would be laid once and never upgraded and take weeks to get repaired.

That is not true. Its not a "natural" monopoly. That would imply that the government is not used to keep out competition. The reason competition is kept out, is because the governments involved will not allow other companies to come in.

You want real competition? How about getting rid of the rules that hold back companies from building more lines.

 

[ElFenix]

In theory city owned lines is a great idea, in reality they would be laid once and never upgraded and take weeks to get repaired.

i'm going to go tell all those people in austin with their city owned electric utility that if they have a local outage they're not supposed to have electricity for weeks. i'll bet they'll be surprised about that.

 

[nickqt]

i'm going to go tell all those people in austin with their city owned electric utility that if they have a local outage they're not supposed to have electricity for weeks. i'll bet they'll be surprised about that.

Didn't you get the memo?

Big gub'mint can't do anything right, mostly because it says so right here in his sentence, and I get that message yelled at me over hate radio and "News" channels all day, every day.

Also: Benghazi.