Haven’t you felt it? Like you couldn’t do anything you wanted to do on the internet? That you couldn’t say what you wanted to say? ‘Or that you couldn’t post the pictures you wanted? You couldn’t find a video you wanted to see? That you couldn’t engage in whatever topic you typed in to the search engine? Did you notice how, even though you lived in a major city, your internet was way too slow? How about all of the political, religious, governmental, or even your weird porn websites that traveled into your home from around the world opening up too slowly? Did you ever get that feeling that you were entitled to more, EVEN IF you didn’t pay for it?
Well the reason you didn’t have those issues, was because the internet worked as technology and finances allow it to. Internet providers have a financial incentive to ensure they have the best service available going to their paying customers. They do this by giving customers excellent, and ever-improving, service. And when they don’t step up to the challenge, they lose customers.
Well, now, the same people who brought you the “Affordable Care Act” …will bring you “Net Neutrality“. Does anyone ACTUALLY think government regulation could possibly make the internet better than what it is now? If famed economist Milton Friedman were still alive, he’d remind us that great achievements (such as the World Wide Web, online banking, VOIP, online pizza ordering, video teleconference, email) aren’t created by government bureaus. The internet is exactly the same… and yet, government is injecting themselves into it. It shouldn’t surprise us but it seems that the central government wants to benefit from the work, resources, and efforts of others, just a squeeze more than it did last week… and the week before that… and the week before that…
But What’s In A Name
“Net Neutrality” is a beautiful name that sounds like a descriptor. It sounds as though it has something to do with making a net (internet) neutral. You’d think it would make the internet somehow better than it is today. But, just as with “The Affordable Care Act” (that does not make ANYTHING more affordable, but just shifts who pays), the central government is actually proposing that it must get involved to ensure that the system is “fair”, even when they have no reason to suggest it isn’t fair. They are intending to portray that the internet is not as neutral (which is why you would need “Net Neutrality”) as it should be — and that government must get involved to ensure it becomes more neutral. Will government regulation really do anything of that sort? Nope! It seems the only people who will benefit from this Net Neutrality SCHEME… is central government.
The internet will not become faster, better, or more free, because of central government regulation. If the effects of central government intervention with the ‘Ma Bell breakup is any harbinger, the internet likely become slower (compared to what it would be without gov regulation), less diverse, more homogenized, and more expensive to use over-time. If we are paying attention, we all know that this is a scam that allows the central government more control over the internet — and THAT is what they really want. Government will attempt to use that control in the same manner as the Chinese and the Russian governments do, but more cautiously and methodically. What is their actual goal? What is it government actually wants:
1. To have a say in what is unreasonable speech or lies (regardless of Constitutional Rights of FREE SPEECH) of those using the internet. “Lies” — will become any statement, the government (through a politicized FCC) determines to be objectionable.
2. To have an individual associated with any comment or speech made on the internet (remove anonymity).
3. To have a method of controlling websites that are against government and highly popular (think Drudge Report).
4. To have a means of punishing political speech that does not favor government (specifically, the party in power).
5. To be able to create money from bandwidth traveling through the internet. Expect a Federal Universal Service Fee expansion for internet use.
6. To condition Americans to accept government control over the internet. – to which government has been successful; as some people have blindly supported this policy without even having seen the regulations yet. They got in line in spite of their ignorance…
The Irony Of It All
As someone who’s lived in, and used the Internet throughout Europe for years, there is a difference in using the internet within the US and Europe. That difference is that the confidence, speed, and stability of internet service is better in MOST of the United States (with the exception of perhaps Germany). Europe is burdened from a lack of financial incentive for companies to make connectivity faster. I kinda felt like the Department of Motor Vehicles was administering my internet service. But soon, with a “Governet”, govt will be forced to create a system in which complaints will become investigated. We all know who will complain more, and that is NOT people who believe in Free Speech. Eventually, the government WILL find a need to regulate a website or two (or 100, 1000, or a class of websites). Imagine having a website shut-down pending investigations… Yea! That’s coming. Imagine needing to speak with a lawyer who specializes in Network Neutrality Law?
It’s ironic because, the internet grew to the point it is now because it has largely been left alone by central government regulators. Some silly, foolish people decided that operating on the internet currently, is too free, AND that it must be regulated because of some undisclosed reasoning. And “5” (yes FIVE) FCC Commissioners voted on 337 pages of rules that will affect 300 Million people. Five, unelected bureaucrats voted on regulations that will benefit the government they work for (which is the definition of corruption). Government has, in effect, made law that no state, or representative of any state, has gotten to see or review yet. And it was all led by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, who proves that not all people who work for the US Government are Patriots. But hey! At least he’s a former Lobbyist — a person whom President Obama would NOT have selected to be the FCC Chairman, if he kept his word about hiring lobbyists when he was running for Presidency.
The kind of people who would want more central government control over the internet are the very same people who think the central government can administer everyone’s healthcare.
But Congratulations Everyone… The Governet Is Here!