I smell a shill.

well said

actually no its not clear as day.
as with most "clear as day" bs you idiots spout, if it actually was she'd be up charged or fined already.

unethical, shady, borderline? absolutely.

illegal? no.

Yep.
Delusional.

you are delusional and/or mentally handicapped.
likely both

they're so committed to them doing nothing they even pass state laws that block cities and townships from passing their own laws.

Like when Seattle upped hteir minimum wage, there was talk in Oklahoma City of raising our minimum wage.

Well obviously we can't have that, so the state legislature very quickly banned any local governments from setting their own minimum wages any higher than hte state level, which happens to be the same as the Federal minimum.

They also passed a law recently banning local governments from banning or restricting oil/gas operations in their jurisdictions.

Yay small government, huh?

Hahhahahaha.

And you mentioned term limits aka "we can't out vote them, so we'll legislate them out, and ignore the will of the people in a democracy"

Anyone want to take bets on obfuscant and diamondmagic being part of the same shill campaign?

Congratulations.
You just defined the main goal and purpose of Net Neutrality.

Only a paid shill could willfully ignore every example that is continually presented him that proves him wrong.

So you apparently believe that liberals exist only to engage in self-destructive behavior? Why do they do so? Do you believe just because they are evil?
Keep throwing around blanket terms of ignorance too, like statist and SJW. It really helps you look intelligent, acting as if having a functional government and caring about equality under the law are bad things to be opposed.

Here's the dose of reality you need:

The internet already operates by and large under the ideals of Net Neutrality.
And it's not just some leftist plot, but a fundamental preservation of free market ideals.

Other than congressional republicants (and a few dems) who are bought and owned by the industry,
it's a concept that enjoys broad bipartisan support. Even the creators of the internet support it.

Net Neutrality isn't a new thing being pushed on the internet. It's how it already operates,
minus a few attempts by the likes of Comcast to get away with various shenanigans.

Net neutrality is the preservation of the status quo.

Hah. As if there is only one school of economic thought with rules written in stone.

Newsflash buddy: Laffer is a sick joke.

And you also prove you know nothing about the Economist magazine.

Redefining is important as it does few things, one of which is blocking them from advertising a s--- sandwich as broadband while the rest of the world (which has competition created through proper regulations) marches ahead. this creates a economic incentive for them to actually increase speeds even without pressure from competition.
--

As for the fast lanes, it seems that you are under the impression that you get to choose to use them or not.

You don't.
The fast lanes aren't for you.

You can still choose different speed teirs of service, whether you want 100 mbps, 50, or 20, or whatever from your ISP.
the FCC isn't interfering in that consumer choice (other than with the definition of what gets to be advertised as "broadband").

the fast lanes are for the websites and content providers looking to do business with you via the internet.
Example:
Comcast owns Hulu.
But you don't like Hulu, you like Netflix.
But Comcast charges Netflix extra to be delivered to you, or slows it down, or any of a few dozen other market distortions to impair the transaction between you and Netflix. Distortions it doesn't create on its own competing service. That isn't free market economics, that's unfair anticompetitive practices.

And that's one of the things Net Neutrality addresses.

I do think it would be even better to block the sort of vertical integration Comcast (and others) is seeking, by being the Content Creator (owning NBC Universal), the Content Service (Hulu), and the Content Deliverer (ISP). In this setup Comcast can discriminate or impair the market function of any Content not theirs (ESPN, 20th Century Fox, etc), any Service not theirs (Youtube, Netflix, etc).

Ideally such integration would be blocked in the first place as then the economic incentive to engage in anticompetitive practices never occurs.
But if such integration is allowed, then a regulating their business behavior via Net Neutrality is the next best thing.

(competition alone is an uncertain fix, as we theoretically have competition in ISPs, but reality has shown they simply tacitly agree to not compete; similarly they could tacitly agree to just not delivery each others Content, so you end up having to buy service from each ISP to get everything and your internet service simply becomes a fancy slightly interactive cable channel. the solution to such anticompetitive practices is again something akin to Net Neutrality or similar regulation to force competition)

natural monopolies exist whether government interferes or not.
that what makes them "natural".

the road to your house as well as every utility (power, water, electrical, gas, and every other line to your house) you have.
government frequently DOES involve itself in natural monopolies, in order to protect the consumer from predatory practices, or to protect the public commons, precisely because there isn't any choice in provider.

but then, see, your problem is you don't even know what a natural monopoly is, what the definition is. this is shown by your including of copyrights and patents. You're one of those loons who thinks monopolies only exist because of government interference.

So edumicate thyself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...

And again you act as if the hundreds of examples we keep giving you never happened and don't exist.
Shill.

For the umpteenth time, you prove you don't know what you're talking about, with the same BS claims that ignore than Net Neutrality is how the internet ALREADY FUNCTIONS. FCC isn't changing anything. It is preserving the status quo. Shill.