doctorconimac

Maybe the cattle will stay on the net, and the rest will leave.

k3mist

You're right. They have no incentive.

The internet is inherently different though from the days of telephone. With telephone the government funded a lot of the infrastructure through grants and this was where the tax came from, or the justification of said tax.

The internet however was not funded by grants, but originally by a single government agency using their own internal budget and since then private companies have invested over $1 trillion in infrastructure.

Regardless, the internet is already taxed; http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2014/10/14/dont_be_fooled_the_internet_is_already_taxed_101331.html

The republicans conceded on the reclassification, so I'm hoping the democrats play ball and concede on ITFA to at least prevent local and state taxes with this bill; https://www.opencongress.org/bill/hr235-114/show

fasthansolo

It's either going to fall under government control or corporate control. Pick your poison

40yearsoftrees

Is there a difference???

fasthansolo

Neither is good. But I'm of the mindset that without a little protection ISPs would act in their best interest rather than the public, which is supposed to be the Government's job.

jerry

Are we too late? I'm not well versed here but it seems were fucked

QuestionEverything

They've planning the ability to censor bits of the internet they don't like for quite awhile. One of the architects: Cass Sunstein is a nightmare of Orwellian proportions- he proposes a free speech tax on the internet.- you can't make this shit up. You would think this type of opinion would get you drawn and quartered! Instead, he's been appointed to Obama's administration and is teaching at Harvard..

Notsquaregarden

He has an incredibly naive view of the free market, I have to say. Companies won't do what's best for the consumer, they'll do what's best for their profits, and those aren't the same thing. I mean, are we going to trust the Comcast and Time Warner will suddenly do the right thing when they have a right to slow down certain websites? Of course not! It's like saying that governments will always do the right thing because they need to be re-elected.

I also don't think that it's wrong for the media to cover Madonna falling over. There's room for serious news and non-seriuos news. I mean, voat's front page currently contains no mentions of ISIS but does have a cat doing yoga. Does that mean we all think cats doing yoga is more important than the war in Syria?