The End of Net Neutrality Means Less Than Nothing

Image Credt: Cnet

Image Credit: Cnet

The FCC just tossed Obama’s attempt to regulate the Internet. When my daughter asked my opinion I told her, “remember back in antiquity (circa 2015) before New Neutrality? When the internet was a thriving, growing, thing looking for every way possible to get as many eyeballs on its corner of the world wide web? 

“It’ll be just like that, and it will keep getting better.”

I reminded her that the Internet boom has been advancing on its own, without any help from ruling class busy-bodies in the nation’s capital for the entire century. And that whenever the biggest players in any endeavor get together with ruling class busy-bodies and try to tell you that they’re going to impose some rules, and they will be good for “everyone” get cynical real fast and prepare to fight them tooth and nail.

One recent example of this is Health Care reform.

ObamaCare’s only goal was to up-end the institutions of health care on the way to a system run entirely by the government. They said and did everything to pretend it would make things better. In the end, it accomplished none of the promised goals but did manage all the real ones.

We still have just as many uninsured. Costs didn’t go down, they went up. Premiums didn’t go down, the went up. Access didn’t stay the same, it declined. People lost their plans their doctors, competition vanished, but the government grew as did the spending to sustain that.

As costs and rates skyrocketed and competition dwindled, more and more people were crowded into existing state-backed coverage. More and more people became reliant on the state, the regulators, and their decisions about what would be covered and how much that should cost, driving providers out and quality down.

No one promoting the reforms promised any of that, while naysayers were pilloried but still right in the end.

If ObamaCare isn’t repealed, it will metastasize and consume the entire market, giving the government and its regulators complete control of your health-care, and by extension you.

That was always the plan.

ObamaCare was sold as a solution, but it was designed to make things worse and government bigger. To give the state more control.

Net Neutrality is no different. Like ObamaCare, it was never meant to improve costs or increase access. It was always about control. But unlike ObamaCare it was never forced through Congress on a partisan party-line vote, it was imposed by bureaucratic sleight of hand.

Just think about this for a moment. President Obama took the internet, which blossomed between 2000 and 2015, creating an environment where people could do almost anything online and do it with super fast speeds at relatively low prices. Along comes the government savior, telling us the best thing for consumers is to subject the internet to rules under a law from 1934, created at a time when people couldn’t make a phone call without the use of two hands.

How many times have you heard the progressives complain about ancient laws that failed to take into consideration advances in technology? More than you can count? Well, not when it comes to the internet. They reached back 70 years for a morsel of ancient regulatory “might” to start the process of Federal control of the internet.

Regulatory control, and with any luck, more revenue to feed the Federal beast.

Oh, and it’s also polluted with first amendment exercises that place a burden on the state’s ability to go about the business of consuming every aspect of our lives. It represents the most significant single threat to authoritarian rule. Unregulated expression.

The government hates unregulated anything.

But left to its own devices content providers will continue to look for faster, cheaper, efficient and easier ways to get the content to consumers of it. A battle that forces existing players to compete with agile new innovators.

Governments have no competition which is why big established players like regulations that protect their market-share.

So what will happen if Net Neutrality goes away? Nothing, because,

The rules were put in place to solve a problem that didn’t exist. 

That is the bottom line. People cannot tell you why the rules were necessary. They can only offer hypotheticals as to why the rules are necessary. But that’s like a cop pulling over a person with a new sports car and writing them a ticket because they might drive 125 mph in a 70 mph zone two weeks from that moment.

The internet didn’t require the nanny state before 2015. The system thrived in a competitive environment. People have so many choices in determining what content they want to watch and how they want it delivered. Everybody benefits. Everybody will continue to benefit once the rules get lifted.

If the ISP’s do what the fearmongers claim, then the government can deal with it if necessary. Until then, sit back, relax and enjoy.

You heard the man.

*While GraniteGrok is down I will be blogging here. And while you are here, join the new media militia. Register your email or get updates on Facebook and Twitter.

About Steve Mac Donald

Husband, Dad, Dog Lover, Blogger, (sometimes) Radio Co-Host, Free Speech Facilitator, Climate Denier, Gun Owner, info-junkie, ...
This entry was posted in Economy/Economics, Reguations and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The End of Net Neutrality Means Less Than Nothing

  1. Steven Curtis says:

    I honestly feel bad for your daughter for having to listen to a bombardment of nonsense from a total ignoramus. I hope for her sake she just tuned you out, assuming this exchange ever even happened to begin with.

    “If the ISP’s do what the fearmongers claim, then the government can deal with it if necessary.”

    Right, when Comcast and the other companies that pushed for this do exactly what “fearmongers” predict, the same government officials who took their money will do an about-face and say, “Sorry, Big Telecom! We were just kidding!”

    Here’s a list-in-progress of congresspeople who voted for this and how much they received from telecom companies. As you can see, most of them come from places that are nothing more than redneck stains on an otherwise potentially decent country.

    Mo Brooks, Alabama, $26,000
    Ron Estes, Kansas, $13,807
    Thomas Massie, Kentucky, $25,000
    Ralph Norman, South Carolina, $15,050
    John Moolenaar, Michigan, $25,000
    Neal Dunn, Florida, $18,500
    Mike Bishop, Michigan, $68,250
    Alex Mooney, West Virginia, $17,750
    Glenn “GT” Thompson, Pennsylvania, $70,500
    Blaine Luetkemeyer, Missouri, $105,000
    Paul Gosar, Arizona, $12,250
    Richard W. Allen, Georgia, $24,250
    Kevin Cramer, North Dakota, $168,500
    Greg Walden, Oregon, $1,605,986
    Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee, $600,999
    Billy Long, Missouri, $221,500
    Gregg Harper, Mississippi, $245,200
    Brett Guthrie, Kentucky, $398,500
    Bill Johnson, Ohio, $196,666
    Jeff Duncan, South Carolina, $41,830
    Earl “Buddy” Carter, Georgia, $39,250
    Susan Brooks, Indiana, $168,500
    Gus Bilirakis, Florida, $234,400
    Markwayne Mullin, Oklahoma, $141,750
    Mimi Walters, California, $161,500
    Joe Barton, Texas, $1,262,757
    Bill Flores, Texas, $127,500
    Pete Olson, Texas, $220,500
    Morgan Griffith, Virginia, $198,900
    Tim Walberg, Michigan, $131,850
    Fred Upton, Michigan, $1,590,125
    Joe Wilson, South Carolina, $104,750
    Martha McSally, Arizona, $84,936
    Blake Farenthold, Texas, $64,250
    Steve Womack, Arkansas, $104,750
    Tom Marino, Pennsylvania, $130,700
    Louie Gohmert, Texas, $85,055
    Walter Jones, North Carolina, $72,800
    Leonard Lance, New Jersey, $290,550
    Steve Chabot, Ohio, $332,083
    Bob Goodlatte, Virginia, $815,099
    Andy Biggs, Arizona, $19,500
    Mark Walker, North Carolina, $35,750
    Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin, $21,200
    Ken Buck, Colorado, $79,350
    Larry Bucshon, Indiana, $71,750
    Chuck Fleischmann, Tennessee, $42,00
    David Rouzer, North Carolina, $34,300
    Paul Mitchell, Michigan, $18,000
    Hal Rogers, Kentucky, $360,450
    Doug Collins, Georgia, $103,600
    Ralph Abraham, Louisiana, $27,300
    Mark Meadows, North Carolina, $14,500
    Michael McCaul, Texas, $216,500
    Jeb Hensarling, Texas, $270,198
    Mike Simpson, Idaho, $125,200
    Tom Emmer, Minnesota, $28,500
    Randy Weber, Texas, $13,750
    Rob Woodall, Georgia, $60,250
    Ted Budd, North Carolina, $15,500
    Ken Calvert, California, $219,212
    Diane Black, Tennessee, $104,750
    Virginia Foxx, North Carolina, $115,700
    Sam Johnson, Texas, $219,785
    James Comer, Kentucky, $22,750
    Trey Gowdy, South Carolina, $83,250
    Lamar Smith, Texas, $810,462
    Steven A King, Iowa, $210,810
    George Holding, North Carolina, $97,750
    Rob Wittman, Virginia, $57,250
    John Lee Ratcliffe, Texas, $53,950
    Jason Lewis, Minnesota, $21,050
    Jim Banks, Indiana, $16,303
    Bill Huizenga, Michigan, $34,000
    Bill Shuster, Pennsylvania, $202,500
    Steven Russell, Oklahoma, $23,500
    Adrian Smith, Nebraska, $165,834
    Jody B Hice, Georgia, $21,000
    Richard Hudson, North Carolina, $136,750
    Douglas L Lamborn, Colorado, $110,543
    Chris Collins, New York, $151,060
    Cathy McMorris-Rodgers, Washington, $673,530
    Brad Wenstrup, Ohio, $33,750
    Andy Barr, Kentucky, $51,100

    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/7xwknx/republican-members-of-congress-fcc-letter

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s