Search results

No one thinks that. Jesus christ. This will damage China by moving production away from them. They will remove their tariffs, or be damaged.... When they do remove their own tariffs, our nation benefits. Not a single person thinks what you imply. You seem to listen to the insane depiction...

China is already losing manufacturing because of this. How long do you think they can play this game? The results will be REAL "Free Trade", fair on both sides. If you want to "blame" that on us, then sure :)

And thus the world learned... If you dont participate in REAL "Free Trade" (fair on both sides), and the consequences will be that companies will move once the US makes things "fair", and the US will not suffer as the result... It is almost like someone knows what they are doing.

To those that think it is the frequency of releases.... I point you to Marvel and their astounding success. These movies drip with agenda. Those that pretend to no see it can continue to act clueless as to why things like this flop, I suppose... I am certainly not about to waste my time...

How do you not understand that the consumer already pays this, just on the end of the ISP... You pay for it one way or another. But we should let NetFlix go without paying their fair share, because they have extorted us by threatening a price hike? Seriously? People have completely consumed...

You mean the exact same anti-trust laws that I referenced earlier and proved that NN wasnt actually needed? Yes. Its the over-reaching Title 2 regulations that allow Governments to determine who has a 'license' to provide internet that is the major free-market-sapping regulation here, among...

You want the non-NetFlix using normal ISP user to pay the difference on the internet usage NetFlix doesnt pay for, rather than NetFlix and their users being burdened with that NetFlix-created cost...? All so you can save money on one end and be charged it on the other? ...... sigh.

Yes you can have the 15Mbps downloads you paid for. It doesnt mean that I am paying enough for upload to you at 15Mbps. What you pay for to download, has nothing to do with what others pay to upload. The internet is a two way street, and you paying to download does not mean I can upload...

Yes. It is those ISPs and their 10-15% profit margins that are the greedy over-reaching ones, not the internet companies and their 50-80% profit margins... *rolls eyes* You want to burden all ISP users with the costs of NetFlix's internet usage. I want to burden actual NetFlix users with...

NetFlix maxed out Cogent and Level 3 and others connectivity, and thought that AT&T and Comcast should pay for it. What you arent understanding here is that the same logic of "If you charge NetFlix, the customers will have to pay for it" applies to the ISPs. If the ISPs need to upgrade...

You have the backwards thinking on this. Send me a file. I pay to download, you pay to upload. It is not free for either of us just because the other one pays for their service. That is fair, as the internet is a two way street... Google and NetFlix are not exempt from that simply because they...

Send me a file. I pay to download, you pay to upload. It is not free for either of us just because the other one pays for their service. That is fair, as the internet is a two way street... Google and NetFlix are not exempt from that simply because they extorted you with price hike threats...

Only one example? Good, atleast I dont have to waste much time appeasing your inability to do your own research: https://www.cultofmac.com/197209/iphone-users-sue-apple-for-locking-their-devices-to-att/ You are literally asking for further regulation while claiming to be more free market...

So you are perfectly fine with paying the ISPs for Google/NetFlix's share of usage now? Werent you just upset about the possibility of paying more when you were not aware that you were already paying it? But now you are okay with it, because it hurts/helps the 'sides' you want? wtf. NN was...

You already pay more for your ISP because NetFlix and Google dont pay their fair share. But you want to continue paying NetFlix/Google's half, because NetFlix/Google have extorted you by threatening to raise your rates if they have to pay their fair share...? Multi-Billion dollar profit...

Those laws I referenced have been taking on "behemoths" for a long time. The argument that they wouldnt be able to take on Verizon or ATT, when they have in the past, is asinine. Electricity is not a two way street, so your analogy is failed. When you send a file to me, you are not exempt...

The free market would eventually result in that, either by existing companies under cutting one another or by enabling competition to offer lower rates to break into markets that are over-charged.... So yes. But I guess you would rather be extorted by Google and NetFlix as they hold price hike...

You PAID for your share. Google and NetFlix should PAY for their share, which they didnt because of prior abuse and NN. Thus you, the consumer, pay the entire cost of internet connectivity. If Google and NetFlix paid their share, then internet wouldnt be as expensive for you the consumer (and...

Maybe Google and NetFlix and others should pay for their fair share of usage, so the burden doesnt fall entirely on the shoulders of the consumers and tax payers....? Why are we protecting Google and NetFlix simply because they have made threats to pass the costs onto the consumers? Isnt that...

What does that have to do with YouTube/NetFlix not paying for the services they use, and those costs being forwarded along to the consumers...?

You pay more for your internet service because the costs of those services fall nearly ENTIRELY on the consumer. The costs fall nearly ENTIRELY on the consumer because content providers like NetFlix and YouTube game the system and dont pay for their fair share. What you are asking for...

I guess you are unfamiliar with CDNs, settlement free peering, and the abuses.

We pay the most because the entirety of the costs of our internet fall on the consumers... Because service providers like YouTube and NetFlix dont pay for any of it while using the vast majority of it. How are you not understanding this? My god...

You, as the consumer, were already paying for the services that the large mammoth corporations were using and not paying for. Where do you think the cost of those service was falling? Do you think the ISPs were just eating the losses for years? Why do you think your individual internet and...

Those laws are intentionally broad, so they can apply to a wide variety of commerce and trade. That is not something that makes them difficult to enforce across markets, it is something that makes them easy to enforce across markets. This is exactly why prior abuses have ended up on court, and...

"In the spirit of overturning Net Neutrality" Dude. Educate yourself and quit spouting off nonsense talking point. Net Nuetrality was NEVER NEEDED. It was nothing more than a power grab allowing the Government to control the 'licensing' of ISPs, and allowing Google/NetFlix/Etc to dominate...

How did these idiots conflate a "100mbps minimum standard" with "reaching more people"? They have nothing to do with each other. For all the 'outraged' people. It was your pro-NN companies that ended up being the censor queens, and let me know when the first death from no-NN takes place...

cock bag?

Here are the ONLY THINGS THAT MATTER. -There are already laws in place that protected from these exact things, hence why these things went to court when they happened (Federal Trace Commission Act, Sherman Act, Clayton Act, FCC Open Internet Order 2010). -Net Neutrality is primarily about...

I am seeking a $3M grant for the same study done on people who eat Turkey Sandwiches as 1 am.

Apparently vastly more than you do. Comes with running a small business and having an education, I guess. Blaming economic capitalism for BS laws forcing consumerism, and suggesting a failed system as an alternative, is absolutely moronic.

No, the people that would be negatively impacted are the people you think you are helping/ They will become dependent, and will eventually starve because of your actions once you run out of other peoples money to finance your 'moral righteousness'.

"Capitalism is the best I agree, we just need to change it to where profits are shared in manner that I view as 'fair'" Oh stfu. You want to fix the 'consumer economy', remove all laws that have to do with people being self-sustainable on their own. Dont force consumerism via laws under the...

You have zero perspective of the past or the world if you think capitalism is falling apart and needs intervention.... Capitalism has resulted in less poverty in the world, and even goes as far as supporting countries who cant support themselves because they are trying socialism.... Again, you...

OH. Other people will pay for it and not you personally. Thats what I thought. No one said anything about 'going galt'. This is about 'greedy people' (your own assumption) preserving their wealth, not about running away to watch society rip itself apart. I am pretty sure you can atleast...

Who makes the Robots? Oh yeah, the rich people. Once they have robots, why do they care if you buy their shit? They only need you to buy their shit so they can continue paying you to produce the things they want. Remove the need for you, and they have absolutely ZERO reason to support you or...

So real talk: Who pays for the UBI? Taxes from business and the rich? And what happens when these people move their businesses, money and selves to a different country? PEOPLE STARVE... You just killed millions of people by creating a dependency that you can not guarantee because you do...

When the businesses and wealth leave the country, you can no longer fund this 'dependency' you have created, and thus millions of people starve. The whole purpose of UBI is to help the worse-off.... But ultimately the worse-off is exactly who ends up dying in the end. This is just like how the...

Drug dealers have decided that fiat currency is the least traceable way to sell drugs. Has always been that way, and will always be that way.... The idea that crypto is somehow more prone to shady transactions is a ridiculous notion.

They actually did it specifically to highlight the risk of it happening, and to warn people about how easily it could occur.