False analogy. There are multiple ISP's in most localities. And more would spring up to fill the need.
Net Neutrality
- Thread starter cheryl
- Start date
Dancing on my grave already.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
In my own little mind, I find these two stands to be irreconcilable:
1) A real Conservative
2) Reducing free market access to individuals in pursuit of their happiness (small/home owned businesses)
Number two sounds more Libertarian. Website owners want to make money on the internet without sharing any proceeds with the owners of the vehicle they're using. Let the market decide. If it's a problem for consumers they'll vote with their feet. If it causes grief to Congressmen they'll repair it with their vote. As in most things it's who's ox is getting gored.
BrownArmy
Well-Known Member
Nice dodge.
Thank you!
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
Last I heard 30% of Americans only had one choice. Suggesting competition will "spring up" shows you have no clue how the infrastructure of internet works.
And you seem to have a poor understanding of how the market works. When others see a need unfulfilled, they risk capital to fill that need. Competition is good for the consumer. As for the average Joe out there, there are few places left where they can't access the internet on their phone. Verizon causing problems? Turn to T-Mobile.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
You're clueless.
Right back at you.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
I need answers gentlemen ... Did the slur stick, miss, slid off?
TearsInRain
IE boogeyman
this is not true outside the urban centers; this is why the legislation regarding telephone service was passed in this regard decades ago, because the free market will not choose to provide good service until absolutely forced to
Look up Safford, AZ on the map. I had 50 meg service there and could've gotten 100. And you can now get an unlimited plan on most cellphone companies. But we're talking about major players in metropolitan areas where most people live. Unless they're all going to collude to force websites to pony up then please explain how one service provider will keep customers from going to another if they start playing games?
TearsInRain
IE boogeyman
that's what they've done in the past
the free market doesn't work with a commodity that has huge overhead
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
No one is arguing that competition will continue to increase in the urban areas as the infrastructure is already in place. Our rural neighbors are not so fortunate-----there are parts of the area that I live in that still do not have broadband service or dependable cell phone service. NY is subsidizing the expansion of broadband and working with cell phone providers to expand their 3G and 4G service.
Our local airport qualifies for EAS (Essential Air Services) subsidies to help offset the costs of providing air service in a rural area.
Never heard of Dish Satellite Internet? Hughes Satellite Internet? We used a Verizon Mifi for internet for awhile in rural AZ. Not to mention those Power Pads that Express couriers use work off of cellphone service, usually AT&T. Used them in remote areas and most of the time had service. Places where I didn't usually had very few people. I'd like to see the number of towns, and how remote they are, in New York or any state outside of Alaska that don't have cell service these days.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
They have cell service but it is spotty at best with numerous dead spots.
When and who? Even AT&T got broken up.
But the vast majority of people do have a choice on ISP's. Let's see what is the reasoning and how it will affect us from all sides before stating unequivocally this is a bad thing. If it turns out to be a bad thing so be it. But so far all I'm hearing is hyperbole.
