hydrogen3
Well-known member
Bloomberg news is a crook?
I do listen to Bloomberg.
Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk
Bloomberg news is a crook?
That is too absolute a view for my taste. Government does some things better than private industry and the revers is also true. Some regulations are a necessary part of life.
Agreed.Personally, i want government to be as our framers created it to be, and nothing more.
These new rules have yet to be published for public consumption by the FCC... what are they waiting for?
Government, in and of itself, is not a problem. The problem arises from our view of government and from the things we expect from government. Instead of viewing it as something that "we" control, we see it as this entity that will save us from anything we see as displeasing. Again, it goes back to taking responsibility for our own actions. Example: We know going in that investing our money in the stock market is a risk, yet, many of us take that risk anyway. However, when things go wrong, and we lose our money and more, we turn to government to find fault in the way our money was invested. I mean, someone had to have cheated me out of my money, right? Well, government will indeed step in and find anything you want them to find, even if they have to make it up. In addition, they'll pass new laws that, in "reality", will give them total control of your money, but "officially", you'll be told that it is to ensure that something like this will have less of a chance happening in the future. Anyway, we are ultimately responsible for the actions of the government. If you want a government to be more involved in personal affairs, that is what you'll get. Personally, i want government to be as our framers created it to be, and nothing more.
I don't think your concerns match up with keeping the internet the way it has always been and not allowing the comcasts of the world alter how quickly we can view the information we want. I don't want them telling me how quickly I can access the sites where I get my information. They have a vested interest in where I get information and what information I get. But we can agree to disagree as well.
So the same administration that couldn't build a website will be running the Internet. Too much government control.
So the same administration that couldn't build a website will be running the Internet. Too much government control.
Do you have to pay for internet access in your home? Do you have to pay for internet access via your wireless service? The answer is probably "yes". Those who charge you for access to the internet have a vested interest. We started out with dial-up, then we had DSL, then cable and soon fiber optics. Do the companies who invest their time, money and research to bring us faster speeds not have a right to be compensated? We seem to have lost sight of the difference between a right and a privilege. Having access to the internet is a "privilege" and a bigger privilege for the fastest available. Don't think for one second that the government does not have a "vested" interest in this matter because it does. They will eventually "control" it, and don't be naive to think that that's a good thing. Anyway, I'm not trying to bust your chops or anything, and I truly do appreciate your input.
The government isn't running the internet. They are regulating the companies who sell it to you.
That's the problem, people actually believe that. This administration is all about control. Obamacare is about control not healthcare. Which by the way if it is so good why have so many opted out? Why are the leaders in Washington not on it? It is all a slow push to socialism. The frog in boiling water experiment. It's happens so slow no one even notices.
I'm sorry but that is paranoia. The members of the government have government healthcare. Obamacare has provided healthcare for over 10 million people who didn't have it before.
It's also caused many places to cut or limit how many hours you can work because of the mandate. I know first hand at my one job they cut the hours for part timers. (it's not my main job, but it was my summer fund job and cut down on the hours I could work) It's not all rainbows and butterflies. I think healthcare is something that is needed, but the way the Government implemented it is wrong, and like others have said is all about control. Obama wants nothing more than total control.I'm sorry but that is paranoia. The members of the government have government healthcare. Obamacare has provided healthcare for over 10 million people who didn't have it before.
It's also caused many places to cut or limit how many hours you can work because of the mandate. I know first hand at my one job they cut the hours for part timers. (it's not my main job, but it was my summer fund job and cut down on the hours I could work) It's not all rainbows and butterflies. I think healthcare is something that is needed, but the way the Government implemented it is wrong, and like others have said is all about control. Obama wants nothing more than total control.
Poorly run businesses have always cut hours to avoid benefits.
Poorly run businesses have always cut hours to avoid benefits. That will and has always happened regardless of obamacare. I do agree that healthcare is needed for all and I think obamacare definitely has room for improvement which is what I'd like to see both parties working on together. I'll disagree on Obama's desire for total control but I don't see much value added in our debating that.
This is government where I work so I guess it's poorly run
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No. Smartly run businesses do.