Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Only YOU Can Protect Net Neutrality
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="cscokd" data-source="post: 2512361" data-attributes="member: 5609"><p>This is the same old argument we have whenever we compare costs models; do you peanut-butter it across everyone, or pile it on only those who will use it?</p><p></p><p>Turnpikes- Why should those who don't use turnpikes pay for them with taxes. Tolls put the burden on only those who use them, including the interstate trucks that don't pay local taxes. </p><p></p><p>Baggage fees - Why should a business traveler on a day-trip share the costs for other people's bags?</p><p></p><p>Ad Valorem Taxes - Why do people without kids pay taxes that go to school bonds? What about home-schoolers or private school families?</p><p></p><p>Streaming Content Providers - Assuming you believe the majority of people shouldn't have to pay for massive upgrades required for the small percentage of users who stream all day, then having the content providers add it to their costs is a sure way to insure those cost are borne by those who use the content.</p><p></p><p>It's a known fact that the majority of bandwidth is consumed by a relatively small number of users who stream content incessantly. I think the market can figure out how to satisfy the majority of their customers. It's in their best interests. Who's interest does the government serve?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cscokd, post: 2512361, member: 5609"] This is the same old argument we have whenever we compare costs models; do you peanut-butter it across everyone, or pile it on only those who will use it? Turnpikes- Why should those who don't use turnpikes pay for them with taxes. Tolls put the burden on only those who use them, including the interstate trucks that don't pay local taxes. Baggage fees - Why should a business traveler on a day-trip share the costs for other people's bags? Ad Valorem Taxes - Why do people without kids pay taxes that go to school bonds? What about home-schoolers or private school families? Streaming Content Providers - Assuming you believe the majority of people shouldn't have to pay for massive upgrades required for the small percentage of users who stream all day, then having the content providers add it to their costs is a sure way to insure those cost are borne by those who use the content. It's a known fact that the majority of bandwidth is consumed by a relatively small number of users who stream content incessantly. I think the market can figure out how to satisfy the majority of their customers. It's in their best interests. Who's interest does the government serve? [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Only YOU Can Protect Net Neutrality
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom