I was surprised to read that Classical Liberals are opposed to Net Neutrality. Wouldn't it be a bad thing if the Internet was no longer Neutral? It would be a lot more difficult to have to pay to use more services of your already current ISP. The internet is great as it is now. If Net Neutrality ended, how wouldn't it become like Enron?
Internet Freedom Act
Classical Liberals/libertarians are for net neutrality (not the legislation named "net neutrality" which is nothing of the sort.)
When the government stays out of private business, the competitive market is neutral (no companies are favored) and consumers choose who gets the money.
Currently, government intervenes in various ways so the market isn't neutral.
The proposal for "net neutrality" is misguided.
http://mises.org/story/2139
Democracy for Breakfast: The internet is great as it is now. If Net Neutrality ended, how wouldn't it become like Enron? Internet Freedom Act
The internet is great as it is now. If Net Neutrality ended, how wouldn't it become like Enron?
The "net neutrality" legislation - which makes the internet less neutral - is a change from the current state. That is, the "net neutrality" legislation changes the current law, so if you like how things are now, you are against the "net neutrality" legislation. McCain's Internet Freedom Bill is actually a good bill if I understand it correctly - it would keep things the way they are now.
"I'm confused about Net Neutrality"
So am I.
And I just want to point out, that is the point / goal of naming it that way. When the state creates confusion about such an obvious issue, then can capitalize and ram through their agenda.
It sickens me.
Conza88: "I'm confused about Net Neutrality" So am I. And I just want to point out, that is the point / goal of naming it that way. When the state creates confusion about such an obvious issue, then can capitalize and ram through their agenda. It sickens me.
Just like health care reform - it's no reform, it's just more intervention. Reform means lessening of government, or an reformulation of the system.
NewLiberty:The "net neutrality" legislation - which makes the internet less neutral - is a change from the current state. That is, the "net neutrality" legislation changes the current law, so if you like how things are now, you are against the "net neutrality" legislation. McCain's Internet Freedom Bill is actually a good bill if I understand it correctly - it would keep things the way they are now.
So then what is with all the hate on his bill?
As far as I can tell, "net neutrality" is a proposed government law prohibiting internet service providers from giving preferential treatment in access speed. For example, an ISP would be forbidden from taking money from, say, this website so that users of that ISP would be connected to Mises.org faster than other sites.
Net neutrality legislation has nothing to do with net neutrality, it is a device whereby the federal government establishes a legal precedent to intervene in the internet and ultimately control our access, just like in China.
there should be no confusion in this forum regarding "net neutrality" legislation.