#stopnetneutrality

Implies that the current ISP’s will be the only ISP’s around in the future, and are thus an oligarchical type of threat to consumers. Pg4 It implies that without rules, the amount of growth seen in the Mobile LTE Broadband market (from 70,000 in 2010 to 127 Million + today) won’t continue to occur without rules. Then it goes on to create a boogeyman threat to this growth. Pg5 Since the first page, it keeps mentioning various thoughts from corporations that the FCC is following for these suggested rules. Last I check, these allegedly ‘evil’ corporations that is threatening the “Open Internet.” The FCC is repeatedly stating that without rules in place the open internet (formerly without very many rules) is being threatened. Just as the Govt did in 2001 and 2004 in reference to the economy, i.e. restricting and further regulating the ‘free market’ to save the ‘free market.’ This directly contradicts the “Net Neutrality” documents by becoming the threat to the open internet that it claims to protect consumers from. Pg7 It implies that the FCC has “learned” what it needs to do through direct democracy, in spite of only consisting of former industry execs (yeah, tell me that isn’t a conflict of interest). Pg6 Implies people have been blocked from the broadband speeds that they pay for, in spite of clear cut options made prior to the passing of ‘Net Neutrality’ such as 3GB of 4G data for $XX.XX, with reduced speed after the 3GB are used up for that billing cycle. Pg7 It forces equalized traffic speeds, which reduces any reason for a smaller business to pay less than another business such Netflix. Now ISP’s can simply charge everyone a higher price. Pg7 When someone uses more electricity than another, do they not pay more? When they use more water, do they, too, not pay more? It’s not going to lower prices to the LCD, it’s going to raise them. Quotes Benjamin Franklin, and cementing (at this point) the hypocrisy that is the FCC’s Net Neutrality laws, “... a little neglect, may breed great mischief.” Pg9 Repeatedly talks of transparency, in spite of this very document being hidden from public view until it was passed.  Claims to be needed because of contract disputes between two companies, for the sake of ‘protecting consumers.’ All this does is protect the corporations, so that they don’t have to make reparations due to loss of service from a dispute. Pg11 Claims “reasonable network management practices” to be something that it isn’t, because consumers failed to read their service contracts. Pg11 Believes that creating rules regarding cell phones in 1994 resulted in a growth boom. You can’t grow something by restricting it. Pg12 Turns 30 statutes into 700 codified rules. Pg16 Forces companies to store customer information on encrypted storage devices, but says nothing about the NSA or other Govt agencies that don’t adhere to the 4th Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Pg16 Creates more boogeymen by implying that without Title II rules, and subsequently these rules, those who are disabled wouldn’t have access to broadband internet. Pg17 Increases the cost of “Universal Service Contributions” which is already passed on to the consumers, thus raising (arbitrarily) costs for consumers. Pg17Talks about the history of the ‘open internet’ by talking about all its previous rules and restrictions. Pg18 Talks about an approximate 45% monopoly on 25mbps broadband service, and how not having these options is bad for consumers while simultaneously making it harder for competition to exist. Talks about need for mobile broadband to be open, while admitting that the FCC restricts the amount of mobile broadband available (only X amount of Q frequency can be used) Pg39/40 Repeats the above throughout the document in various places. Repetition is the key to success? This is something that’s been done by Govts and agencies of all sorts throughout history. Repetition, and creating falsified oppositions. This is known as Hegelian dialectic. Restrict the individual through laws that appear to the individual as if they are there to help the individual. Pg. 50-400