Conundrum wrote:
I don't want to have to study all my internet packages to see which one is the best deal and who was a good deal but now is sneaking in changes and charges that I am not paying attention to.
In other words, you're lazy.
Conundrum wrote:
I don't want to have to study all my internet packages to see which one is the best deal and who was a good deal but now is sneaking in changes and charges that I am not paying attention to.
In other words, you're lazy.
Conundrum wrote:
I don't want to have to study all my internet packages to see which one is the best deal and who was a good deal but now is sneaking in changes and charges that I am not paying attention to.
Wow, I didn't Millennial Syndrome was so prevalent. You probably don't shop around for a competitive interest rate at banks either.
SayWhat2 wrote:
Beautiful Day wrote:
Yeah, I'm sure everyone wants Comcast Streaming Services instead of Netflix.
https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/svn9iXO9bovU9VNWCu48yASkAO0=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4252153/what-is-net-neutrality-isp-package-diagram.0.jpgDems voted yes not republicans
Thank you and you are 100% right. The Dems twist everything.
Makes my brain hurt wrote:
Conundrum wrote:
I don't want to have to study all my internet packages to see which one is the best deal and who was a good deal but now is sneaking in changes and charges that I am not paying attention to.
Wow, I didn't Millennial Syndrome was so prevalent. You probably don't shop around for a competitive interest rate at banks either.
But probably complains to Big Daddy the govt bank regulator that he's being "ripped off" all the same.
Dhjnkmbfj wrote:
The internet flourished for 25 years completely, utterly unregulated before the misnomered net neutrality law. If you say repealing it will “kill” the internet, you’re simply the dumbest f*ck alive and there is no point in arguing with you.
“Such things have happened before. In 2007, for example, The Associated Press found that Comcast was blocking or throttling some file-sharing. And AT&T blocked Skype and other internet calling services on the iPhone until 2009.”
The New Lets Run wrote:
Runners defending big corporations... who would have thought?
The leftist worldview:
Big corporations = bad.
Big government = good.
Reality:
Big corporations have amassed wealth because they have produced goods and services at a quality/price that millions of people considered good, and willingly bought. The big corporation can stay in business by continuing to provide these goods/services at prices the customer will pay. Big corporations shrink and disappear when they fail to do this.
Big governments have just as much wealth as big corporations. However, they also have the ability to use violence to physically coerce people to continue to give them their money and allegiance. Big governments disappear only through revolutions that usually involve death and suffering.
Sometimes big corporations try to lobby the government to protect their market share. In this way, a big corporation essentially coopts the government's monopoly on violence. When this happens, it is a bad thing. The only recourse the citizen has is to try to limit the power of the government and by extension, the power of the big corporation. To think the solution to this problem (corporation coopting government power) is to increase the power of government is complete lunacy. Ergo, leftism = lunacy.
Leftist are so distracted with seeing the whole world through the lens of oppression and oppressor, that they actually work to limit their own freedom, and increase the size of the State, the entity that has caused more oppression that any other single entity in history. It blows my mind when I see the number of people on this message board who start screaming and yelling about Republican oppression, and their solution is to invite more government oppression. I just don't get it.
not people wrote:
Mmnhh wrote:
Democrat-darling Planned Parenthood alone killed over 3000,000 little guys and girls last year.
An unborn fetus is not "little guys and girls." That sort of mentality is so fvcking stupid.
You're a little guy with a very, very little guy.
Names of the three who voted to harm consumers by rolling back Net Neutrality rules:
Chairman Ajit Pai - R
Commissioner Brendan Carr - R
Commissioner Michael O'Rielly - R
The two Democrats on the committee did not vote to harm consumers.
This is proof positive that when you vote Republican, you act against your own self interests.
celery wrote:
The New Lets Run wrote:
Runners defending big corporations... who would have thought?
The leftist worldview:
Big corporations = bad.
Big government = good.
Reality:
Big corporations have amassed wealth because they have produced goods and services at a quality/price that millions of people considered good, and willingly bought. The big corporation can stay in business by continuing to provide these goods/services at prices the customer will pay. Big corporations shrink and disappear when they fail to do this.
Big governments have just as much wealth as big corporations. However, they also have the ability to use violence to physically coerce people to continue to give them their money and allegiance. Big governments disappear only through revolutions that usually involve death and suffering.
Sometimes big corporations try to lobby the government to protect their market share. In this way, a big corporation essentially coopts the government's monopoly on violence. When this happens, it is a bad thing. The only recourse the citizen has is to try to limit the power of the government and by extension, the power of the big corporation. To think the solution to this problem (corporation coopting government power) is to increase the power of government is complete lunacy. Ergo, leftism = lunacy.
Leftist are so distracted with seeing the whole world through the lens of oppression and oppressor, that they actually work to limit their own freedom, and increase the size of the State, the entity that has caused more oppression that any other single entity in history. It blows my mind when I see the number of people on this message board who start screaming and yelling about Republican oppression, and their solution is to invite more government oppression. I just don't get it.
+10000000
Sure, the history of big money, major corporations, and semi-public utilities in America is beyond reproach. Only a communist would criticize them. They deserve to do whatever they want. They can be depended on to act in the average Americans' interest. The men who run them are the true great Americans. The market will correct everything.
RBoston wrote:
celery wrote:
The leftist worldview:
Big corporations = bad.
Big government = good.
Reality:
Big corporations have amassed wealth because they have produced goods and services at a quality/price that millions of people considered good, and willingly bought. The big corporation can stay in business by continuing to provide these goods/services at prices the customer will pay. Big corporations shrink and disappear when they fail to do this.
Big governments have just as much wealth as big corporations. However, they also have the ability to use violence to physically coerce people to continue to give them their money and allegiance. Big governments disappear only through revolutions that usually involve death and suffering.
Sometimes big corporations try to lobby the government to protect their market share. In this way, a big corporation essentially coopts the government's monopoly on violence. When this happens, it is a bad thing. The only recourse the citizen has is to try to limit the power of the government and by extension, the power of the big corporation. To think the solution to this problem (corporation coopting government power) is to increase the power of government is complete lunacy. Ergo, leftism = lunacy.
Leftist are so distracted with seeing the whole world through the lens of oppression and oppressor, that they actually work to limit their own freedom, and increase the size of the State, the entity that has caused more oppression that any other single entity in history. It blows my mind when I see the number of people on this message board who start screaming and yelling about Republican oppression, and their solution is to invite more government oppression. I just don't get it.
+10000000
It just goes to show all these colleges are doing their intended job and brain-washing the hell out of the 20 somethings posting on here that love their bloated centralized Govt and everything that Obama and the Democrat party stand for.
Not quite buddy wrote:
Dhjnkmbfj wrote:
The internet flourished for 25 years completely, utterly unregulated before the misnomered net neutrality law. If you say repealing it will “kill” the internet, you’re simply the dumbest f*ck alive and there is no point in arguing with you.
“Such things have happened before. In 2007, for example, The Associated Press found that Comcast was blocking or throttling some file-sharing. And AT&T blocked Skype and other internet calling services on the iPhone until 2009.”
Yep. Nextradio could allow you to hear broadcast radio on your phone, but Verizon disables it so you have to stream and they can see everything you listen to.
Comcast was doing that to combat piracy, so people would have to buy Comcast products. AT&T directly competed with Skype. Skype, albeit at a lower value, probably still would have been bought out by Microsoft. Innovation happens, but the big guy gets it at a cheaper price.
celery wrote:
The leftist worldview:
Big corporations = bad.
Big government = good.
Reality:
Big corporations have amassed wealth because they have produced goods and services at a quality/price that millions of people considered good, and willingly bought. The big corporation can stay in business by continuing to provide these goods/services at prices the customer will pay. Big corporations shrink and disappear when they fail to do this.
Big governments have just as much wealth as big corporations. However, they also have the ability to use violence to physically coerce people to continue to give them their money and allegiance. Big governments disappear only through revolutions that usually involve death and suffering.
Sometimes big corporations try to lobby the government to protect their market share. In this way, a big corporation essentially coopts the government's monopoly on violence. When this happens, it is a bad thing. The only recourse the citizen has is to try to limit the power of the government and by extension, the power of the big corporation. To think the solution to this problem (corporation coopting government power) is to increase the power of government is complete lunacy. Ergo, leftism = lunacy.
Leftist are so distracted with seeing the whole world through the lens of oppression and oppressor, that they actually work to limit their own freedom, and increase the size of the State, the entity that has caused more oppression that any other single entity in history. It blows my mind when I see the number of people on this message board who start screaming and yelling about Republican oppression, and their solution is to invite more government oppression. I just don't get it.
Assuming you are being sincere with your last sentence: some of us quite like the idea of democratic (that's a small "d") power; i.e., the principle that power in a polity should be roughly shared by its members, without regard to wealth (or gender, race, etc.).
You should go out and talk to a few liberals or leftists (IRL, to avoid the many deficiencies of anonymous internet conversation)! Many of them are happy to explain why they think the way they do.
What a week.
Republicans ruin the internet. And Trump's "biggest tax cut ever" increases my taxes for the next 8 years.
The only good news is a child f-ker did not get elected in Alabama.
I think the Blue Wave Inc. plan for the 2018 elections will be a beautiful thing.
the principle that power in a polity should be roughly shared by its members
I'd rather be governed by the first 1000 people in the Boston phonebook than the Harvard faculty.
celery wrote:
It seems a lot of people on this board need a lesson in basic economics, so here goes;
If netfix raises prices above what you are willing to pay, drop the service. Either a lot of people drop service and Netflix realizes they need to drop their prices to retain customers, or people stick with Netflix at the higher price, resulting in Netflix having massive profits. Venture capitalist notice there are massive profits to be made in the online streaming industry, so new content providers enter the mix, and prices come back down.
The same hold true for ISP providers, widget makers, whatever. If people are not happy with the quality/price of something, their demand for it goes down. If they still demand that good or service at a profitable price for the producer, supply goes up because more producers of that good/service enter the market, causing prices to drop back down. On balance, people continue to get the goods and services at the price they are willing to pay.
A price driven system creates competition because profits are always being sought and losses are always being avoided. The only thing that prevents the normal equalization of prices is inhibition of entry into the market. This inhibition is usually in the form of government regulation (aka net neutrality).
And it seems like you passed Econ 101. Unfortunately, that's like physics 101 where they teach you that a mass on an ideal slope with no friction will accelerate. The real world is just a little more complicated. People that run their lives based on their econ 101 courses are what I call Republicans. They think they know what they are talking about, but they know just enough to be dangerous.
Bank regulator me wrote:
Conundrum wrote:
I don't want to have to study all my internet packages to see which one is the best deal and who was a good deal but now is sneaking in changes and charges that I am not paying attention to.
In other words, you're lazy.
I spend time researching important things. My time is valuable and searching for the best internet package and then making sure terms don't change does not thrill me.
But some may not have things that are that interesting to do so they don't mind it.
Power-sharing, you say? wrote:
the principle that power in a polity should be roughly shared by its members
I'd rather be governed by the first 1000 people in the Boston phonebook than the Harvard faculty.
I forget who it was (Belloc?), but someone in early-mid 20th century noted that under "democracy", the political dynasties in the UK were more notable than they had been under nobility. Likely when Neville Chamberlain was PM. Lock-in effect is pretty demonstrative, and indeed already Aristotle discusses it in his (somewhat tedious) descriptions of the various (and varied) failed Athenian democracies.
Conundrum wrote:
Bank regulator me wrote:
In other words, you're lazy.
I spend time researching important things. My time is valuable and searching for the best internet package and then making sure terms don't change does not thrill me.
But some may not have things that are that interesting to do so they don't mind it.
I'm lazy (yet superior to you of course), and I think MY time is important: so much so that I don't think YOU should be able to make your own deal about the Internet - everyone should just accept the one-sized fits-no-one solution of government.
Economics 101, Look up consumer elasticity. When prices are very straight forward consumer elasticity is high. When pricing of packages are more obscure and complex, consumer elasticity becomes lower. It's much easier for companies to over charge consumers. There is a reason for long contracts in small print. It's certainly not for your protection. Celery, You left that important concept out of your explaination.
UsedToBeKnowItAll wrote:
celery wrote:
It seems a lot of people on this board need a lesson in basic economics, so here goes;
If netfix raises prices above what you are willing to pay, drop the service. Either a lot of people drop service and Netflix realizes they need to drop their prices to retain customers, or people stick with Netflix at the higher price, resulting in Netflix having massive profits. Venture capitalist notice there are massive profits to be made in the online streaming industry, so new content providers enter the mix, and prices come back down.
The same hold true for ISP providers, widget makers, whatever. If people are not happy with the quality/price of something, their demand for it goes down. If they still demand that good or service at a profitable price for the producer, supply goes up because more producers of that good/service enter the market, causing prices to drop back down. On balance, people continue to get the goods and services at the price they are willing to pay.
A price driven system creates competition because profits are always being sought and losses are always being avoided. The only thing that prevents the normal equalization of prices is inhibition of entry into the market. This inhibition is usually in the form of government regulation (aka net neutrality).
And it seems like you passed Econ 101. Unfortunately, that's like physics 101 where they teach you that a mass on an ideal slope with no friction will accelerate. The real world is just a little more complicated. People that run their lives based on their econ 101 courses are what I call Republicans. They think they know what they are talking about, but they know just enough to be dangerous.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4252153/what-is-net-neutrality-isp-package-diagram.0.jpg){kind=link}