Net Neutrality is bad and not needed. I know it sounds good, but really what is ever made better when the government tries to control it?
1. Before 2015, there was no Net Neutrality. The internet worked just fine and internet speeds continued to get faster and faster. Also before 2015, there had only been a couple of cases of internet service providers slowing speeds. And in the case of Netflix getting slowed by Comcast in 2014, it was fixed between the two companies before Net Neutrality went into effect. The free market fixed the issue, not the government.
2. Liberals like to argue that Net Neutrality must be good, because big ISP companies like Comcast and Verizon are against it. But I can make the same argument against Net Neutrality based on the fact that even bigger companies like Goggle, Facebook, Netflix, and Amazon are for Net Neutrality.
3. We don't need the government to regulate internet speeds, because the free market will do it. ISPs that slow popular sites like Netflix or Amazon will lose business. If Comcast starts to slow sites I want, then I will look for a new ISP. And without Net Neutrality it will create more ISPs. If every company has to offer the same speeds at the same price for all content, then there is no reason for companies to expand into other areas. This keeps rural areas from getting more internet providers. Without Net Neutrality if a company like Comcast starts slowing speeds, then it will open the door for competition.
4. When was the last time you heard about ISP or moblie companies talking about offering slower speed. Comcast just increased my speed to 100mbps for free. Why? So that I will stay with them.
5. From the dailywire.com, "FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai explained how smaller ISPs are struggling as a result of net neutrality regulations:
“Among our nation’s 12 largest internet service providers,” he told the audience, “domestic broadband capital expenditures decreased by 5.6%, or $3.6 billion, between 2014 and 2016.” I ask him to elaborate. “As I’ve seen it and heard it,” he says, “Title II regulations have stood in the way of investment. Just last week, for instance, we heard from 19 municipal broadband providers. These are small, government-owned ISPs who told us that ‘even though we lack a profit motive, Title II has affected the way we do business.’ ”
The small ISPs reported that Title II was preventing them from rolling out new services and deepening their networks. “These are the kinds of companies that we want to provide a competitive alternative in the marketplace,” Mr. Pai says. “It seems to me they’re the canaries in the coal mine. If the smaller companies are telling us that the regulatory overhang is too much, that it hangs like a black cloud over our businesses—as 22 separate ISPs told us three weeks ago—then it seems to me there’s a problem here that needs to be solved.”"
6. Again from the dailywire.com, "This is bad economics, as Ben Shapiro explained:
Netflix consumes a huge amount of peak traffic bandwidth. That costs ISPs money. Pornography sites consume a huge amount of bandwidth. That costs ISPs money. Were an ISP to push YouPorn to pay fees for its higher bandwidth, consumers of the ISP who did not use YouPorn would be the beneficiaries — they wouldn’t be subsidizing YouPorn. As Alexandra Petri of Washington Post writes, “To use one of those dreaded analogies, if you are constantly driving huge trucks, full of big deliveries of pornography, along a road, why shouldn’t you have to pay more for the road’s upkeep?”
Meanwhile, other ISPs could calculate that they want to absorb the costs of YouPorn in order to carry YouPorn, since YouPorn could refuse to pay the fees to the first ISP. That would be an advantage for the second ISP. In other words, market choices take place, and those can provide options to consumers. Net neutrality would ban such deals."
7. The reason why the internet has been so great is because we have little interference from the government. Net Neutrality is Bad, because it isn't based on the free market.
