Republicans’ “Internet Freedom Act” would wipe out net neutrality

[MblaZe7run]

Hahaha she's hilarious, I mean she can't be serious right? Right? Oh USA I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.

 

Please cry. Or adopt me into your household. I'm surrounded by naive morons here (not saying I can't be one, because I can in some cases), and I can't get out.

[ivan134]

I guess that's why Democrats still control the House and Senate? Or did they get booted for forcing us to go buy a product from a private company? Imagine how people would be pissed off if we were forced to buy 'internet' from Comcast or TWC yet that's what they did with medical insurance. But being forced to buy insurance from a private company is ok?

And anyone in the House can propose a bill. Doesn't mean the entire party supports that bill. The vast majority of bills never even come up for a general vote on the floor because they never make it through committee.

Both parties are screwed up and don't have the people's interest in mind. Its all about cronyism, donors, kickbacks, and outright corruption.

Are you actually implying that Republicans control congress because that's where popular opinion has shifted? I almost feel bad for you and how you will feel in 2016. As much as I'm a left leaning independent, a lot of lefties are stupid and don't get as involved as they should in the political process. Only 1/3 of the people who voted in the last presidential cycle turned out to vote last year. The problem is an "I don't care attitude." The country is not actually becoming more right wing.

[Sharp_3yE]

No doubt republicans want to destroy the world.

That is one very ignorant statement. I just really dislike when people blame one side yet not the other on every issue. All parties have their downsides.

 

They don't need the freedom to do shit. They need to upgrade their fucking networks.

Well, don't they need the freedom to be able to upgrade their networks?

[Sharp_3yE]

I just have a question. Does anyone actually know what all of the title 2 and laws say and HOW they make things better. I understand some of it already but I've been trying to find details but the information gets lost in tons of useless info.

[themaniac]

i'm just gonna this poeple just shut up and let x amount of internet speed be free

[Jade]

That is one very ignorant statement. I just really dislike when people blame one side yet not the other on every issue. All parties have their downsides.

 

Well, don't they need the freedom to be able to upgrade their networks?

They already have that. In the form of hundreds of millions of dollars that were pocketed.

[Sharp_3yE]

They already have that. In the form of hundreds of millions of dollars that were pocketed.

I think you didn't understand. You said, "They don't need the freedom to do shit. They need to upgrade their fucking networks." but isn't that contradicting? If you don't have freedom to do anything how can they upgrade their networks? So my point is that they do need freedom to do their business.

[ltguy]

Trust me these fool politicians don't speak for all of us republicans. Any educated non-career politician republican is totally in favor of net neutrality .

[Oberon.Smite]

No, that would be counter intuitive, they just want to own it, control it and make lots of money from it.

Pretty much the Republican party is dedicated to rich white people keeping and making more and more money while keeping everyone down and limiting oppurtinies so they can maintain their superiority.

 

so ya...

[dalekphalm]

I guess that's why Democrats still control the House and Senate? Or did they get booted for forcing us to go buy a product from a private company? Imagine how people would be pissed off if we were forced to buy 'internet' from Comcast or TWC yet that's what they did with medical insurance. But being forced to buy insurance from a private company is ok?

 

And anyone in the House can propose a bill. Doesn't mean the entire party supports that bill. The vast majority of bills never even come up for a general vote on the floor because they never make it through committee. 

 

Both parties are screwed up and don't have the people's interest in mind. Its all about cronyism, donors, kickbacks, and outright corruption. 

That's a very bad analogy.

 

The Affordable Healthcare Act (AKA: ObamaCare) does not force you to buy internet from a specific vendor. In fact, one of the main components is private healthcare businesses competing for your business, all available via the AHA website.

 

Your analogy would have made more sense if it was "We were forced to buy Internet... in some form... from whoever we choose or can get the best deal from." Quite a bit different from what you said.

[Jade]

I think you didn't understand. You said, "They don't need the freedom to do shit. They need to upgrade their fucking networks." but isn't that contradicting? If you don't have freedom to do anything how can they upgrade their networks? So my point is that they do need freedom to do their business.

What I said wasn't meant in a 100% literal sense. They already have the ability to expand and upgrade their networks.

[Briggsy]

I'm gonna run out of popcorn, jeez.

 

[spartaman64]

I guess that's why Democrats still control the House and Senate? Or did they get booted for forcing us to go buy a product from a private company? Imagine how people would be pissed off if we were forced to buy 'internet' from Comcast or TWC yet that's what they did with medical insurance. But being forced to buy insurance from a private company is ok?

 

And anyone in the House can propose a bill. Doesn't mean the entire party supports that bill. The vast majority of bills never even come up for a general vote on the floor because they never make it through committee. 

 

Both parties are screwed up and don't have the people's interest in mind. Its all about cronyism, donors, kickbacks, and outright corruption. 

you do know that all other developed countries have national healthcare 

[Jerakl]

[TopWargamer]

Before we start shouting out who's more stupid, let's get something clear real quick - We don't even know anything about the legislation yet, or at least you (OP) didn't point out what the legislation would be doing in specific. Also keep in mind that only a small fraction of Republicans in power - about 30 in total, so says the article - are supporting the legislation. That's not a lot at all. So I wouldn't really call this the Republican's "Internet Freedom Act" but rather a piece of legislation created by a person. The only Republican thing about this is that it was made by a Republican, and in no way reflects party's majority view on the matter, as seen by the number of Republican supporters.

 

Let's wait until we have some more details on the legislation, then lay it down side by side next to the recently passed net neutrality rules. After that, then we can start calling people stupid for bringing up the legislation if you desire.

 

The fact of the matter is that the recently passed net neutrality rules are far too popular, and the "Internet Freedom Act" is not. I don't think it's going to gain much traction pass where it's at right now. If this legislation were to make it to the FCC, the reality is that it would more than likely get shot down. Remember, the recently passed net neutrality rules won in a 3 to 2 vote. So even if those 2 people voted in favor of the "Internet Freedom Act", the other 3 people would just kill it off.

 

Quite frankly, if you're worried that net neutrality is in danger, don't be. I don't think you have anything to worry about.

[Trik'Stari]

I guess that's why Democrats still control the House and Senate? Or did they get booted for forcing us to go buy a product from a private company? Imagine how people would be pissed off if we were forced to buy 'internet' from Comcast or TWC yet that's what they did with medical insurance. But being forced to buy insurance from a private company is ok?

 

And anyone in the House can propose a bill. Doesn't mean the entire party supports that bill. The vast majority of bills never even come up for a general vote on the floor because they never make it through committee. 

 

Both parties are screwed up and don't have the people's interest in mind. Its all about cronyism, donors, kickbacks, and outright corruption. 

 

Basically this^

 

It is WELL past time we cleaned house and fired every single politician in the country, and then deport them and their immediate families, permanently. Including any and ALL future descendants.

 

I am trying to thing of a blanket insult for all politicians, but I honestly can't think of something both severe and fitting enough.

 

 

Before we start shouting out who's more stupid, let's get something clear real quick - We don't even know anything about the legislation yet, or at least you (OP) didn't point out what the legislation would be doing in specific. Also keep in mind that only a small fraction of Republicans in power - about 30 in total, so says the article - are supporting the legislation. That's not a lot at all. So I wouldn't really call this the Republican's "Internet Freedom Act" but rather a piece of legislation created by a person. The only Republican thing about this is that it was made by a Republican, and in no way reflects party's majority view on the matter, as seen by the number of Republican suppoters.

 

Let's wait until we have some more details on the legislation, then lay it down side by side next to the recently passed net neutrality rules. After that, then we can start calling people stupid for bringing up the legislation if you desire.

 

The fact of the matter of the matter is that the recently passed net neutrality rules are far too popular, and the "Internet Freedom Act" is not. I don't think it's going to gain much traction pass where it's at right now. If this legislation were to make it to the FCC, the reality is that it would more than likely get shot down. Remember, the recently passed net neutrality rules won in a 3 to 2 vote. So even if those 2 people voted in favor of the "Internet Freedom Act", the other 3 people would just kill it off.

 

Quite frankly, if you're worried that net neutrality is in danger, don't be. I don't think you have anything to worry about.

 

You honestly think popularity has ANYTHING to do with whether or not a law is passed, when there isn't an election coming up? Oh how I miss those naive years.

[TopWargamer]

You honestly think popularity has ANYTHING to do with whether or not a law is passed, when there isn't an election coming up? Oh how I miss those naive years.

When election time comes around, popularity is very important to a party. It determines a win or a loss. Both parties attempt to gain popularity during this time. If the Republicans want a win, which they do, then there's no way that the majority of them will get behind the "Internet Freedom Act."

[Takata]

Some ISPs in my country claim to use "traffic shaping" policies at peak times of the day, for uncapped internet plans. Ie, they deprioritise stuff like torrents, which don't need low latency, and prioritise stuff like web pages and teleconferencing, which needs low latency. Seems like the most ethical form of "throttling" to me.

Pretty sure I've got a choice of at least 5 ISPs though if I didn't like that.

[TooManyErrors]

This is the reason why Republicans have the image of being uneducated and stupid. All because of the actions of a few dumb, selfish, corporate whores.

(Note: I'm not saying that Republicans are uneducated and stupid, only that this is why they have that reputation.)

[Skrizzles]

I just LOVE the way when one Republican does something silly, everyone KNOWS that this one single person speaks for ALL of us. <---------Dat Sarcasm

 

"UH-OH, a Republican is sponsoring a bill that doesn't sound too smart. ALL republicans wanna watch the world/internet burn. Huhr-Duhr"

 

I say the following without fear or favor - ALL people who think that one person speaks for an entire group, are jackasses.

 

Take your universal theory and go crawl back under the rock you came from.

[NateGSR117]

I just can't anymore, this is just ridiculous. 

 

But being forced to buy insurance from a private company is ok?

 

I don't know if you know but, but one of the reason why that happen is because of pharmaceutical companies lobbying their way to congress to strike down Obama original plan for health care reform. He had to redraft a new bill until the drug companies like the idea to let it pass (midway through he was like fuck it I need something). This is crazy, the president of the USA got stop and force to change his original goals and promise because of the drug companies. If this isn't over reaching and corruption I don't know what is then, companies shouldn't be in this involved or powerful in a government for the people by the people not for the business by the companies. What people should get angry over is that companies shouldn't be in government, or if a company gives a legislator money they aren't allow to make decision on what that company competes in.

[ivan134]

I just can't anymore, this is just ridiculous.

I don't know if you know but, but one of the reason why that happen is because of pharmaceutical companies lobbying their way to congress to strike down Obama original plan for health care reform. He had to redraft a new bill until the drug companies like the idea to let it pass (midway through he was like fuck it I need something). This is crazy, the president of the USA got stop and force to change his original goals and promise because of the drug companies. If this isn't over reaching and corruption I don't know what is then, companies shouldn't be in this involved or powerful in a government for the people by the people not for the business by the companies. What people should get angry over is that companies shouldn't be in government, or if a company gives a legislator money they aren't allow to make decision on what that company competes in.

You're talking to people who were in favor classifying corporations as "people."

[pit5000]

i hate politicians

[Jack.EXE]

man, I'm normally considered a republican, and even I think they're stupid.

[NateGSR117]

You're talking to people who were in favor classifying corporations as "people."

Well you got me there, I only recently been into/reading about what happens in USA. But I think that was a mistake, then again what do I know.