wiyosaya
Posts: 9,783 +9,686
?This! Eactly!
Some people out there have difficulty seeing the big picture; I think you see it clearly, @cliffordcooley .
Bernie Sanders aims to break up ISP and cable monopolies
- Thread starter Shawn Knight
- Start date
Some people out there have difficulty seeing the big picture; I think you see it clearly, @cliffordcooley .
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
People said the same thing about FDR and his new deal. It ended up being wildly successful. A Fun fact, FDR was drafting a 2nd bill of rights that included universal healthcare, among other things.
"
- The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
- The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
- The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
- The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
- The right of every family to a decent home;
- The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
- The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
- The right to a good education.
Second Bill of Rights - Wikipedia
Of course, he died before he could enact it. FYI FDR is widely considered to be one of the best presidents the United States has ever had.
It is really sad that some Americans are stuck more then 60 years in the past. America is one of the few 1st world countries without universal healthcare and cheap higher education. It also spends more per capita on healthcare and education then other 1st world countries, often 3 times what other countries spend per capita. Service metrics certainly don't show it being superior either.
FYI if the amount increase in taxes is less then the amount you are spending now on healthcare, that's a net savings. People are quick to pick up their pitchforks when it comes to increasing taxes but if you think about it, there is an opportunity to save a lot of money. People don't seem to realize that by pooling that money together, the combined buying power gains significant leverage for the taxpayers.
OptimumSlinky
Posts: 276 +510
People said the same thing about FDR and his new deal. It ended up being wildly successful. A Fun fact, FDR was drafting a 2nd bill of rights that included universal healthcare, among other things.
"
"
- The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
- The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
- The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
- The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
- The right of every family to a decent home;
- The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
- The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
- The right to a good education.
Second Bill of Rights - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Of course, he died before he could enact it. FYI FDR is widely considered to be one of the best presidents the United States has ever had.
It is really sad that some Americans are stuck more then 60 years in the past. America is one of the few 1st world countries without universal healthcare and cheap higher education. It also spends more per capita on healthcare and education then other 1st world countries, often 3 times what other countries spend per capita. Service metrics certainly don't show it being superior either.
FYI if the amount increase in taxes is less then the amount you are spending now on healthcare, that's a net savings. People are quick to pick up their pitchforks when it comes to increasing taxes but if you think about it, there is an opportunity to save a lot of money. People don't seem to realize that by pooling that money together, the combined buying power gains significant leverage for the taxpayers.
Couldn't have put it better myself.
You're already paying INSANE taxes for healthcare; you're just paying them to a for-profit corporation that pays its CEO $30M+ a year and spends a huge portion of its budget on advertising.
Every other G-8 nation has figured out how cover healthcare for its citizens, yet here in the USA we offer socialism for our corporations in the form of subsidies, monopolies, and effectively no taxes with all the exemptions we give them, yet we offer bitter, cold capitalism for our citizens.
It's insane, and not in a good way.
cliffordcooley
Posts: 13,141 +6,441
Sadly that does nothing to break the technological stagnation in our ISP infrastructure. If it did we would have been upgraded from 3Mbits by now. That is the same service we had 15 years ago. Our machines have become 1000 times faster over the last 15 years. But they want us to think their equipment hasn't. And these regulations to regulate, does nothing to help matters.
wiyosaya
Posts: 9,783 +9,686
Absolutely! I think what I said in my post above about Specturd in my area exemplifies what you expressed in this post. Specturd absolutely has 100 M-bit service in our area, yet refuses to roll it out to existing customers. Its not just my neighbor, but my boss, too. If I asked around, I would not at all be surprised if other Specturd customers are stuck at whatever speeds they were at years ago, too. The only way to force Specturd to give you higher speeds in my area is to drop them for 30-days, then go back.
However, I think Specturd is in for a rude awakening just like sIntel has had in the past two years.
The way that I see it, people are captivated by what those with the money have to say.
After all, IMO, our society values wealth pretty much above all else in life, and if anyone has found a way to siphon off a large amount of wealth into their bank accounts, then they must know what they are doing.
As I see it, it is very rare for anyone with significant wealth to be even remotely philanthropic. Money seems to go to their heads and egos. The have no clue how the rest of the people in the word live, have no clue what it is like to live in poverty, and have little to no gratitude for what they have and the fact that they are where they are instead of living under a bridge or on the streets, and yet they seem to want more, and more, and more.
The way that I see it, these people don't know Jack Sh!t about life.
Remember when Bill Gates launched a contest for a design of a sewage treatment system for rural India a few years back which resulted in a multi-million dollar sewage treatment plant that not only could rural India not afford, but would also have required a significant amount of supporting infrastructure? Well someone finally took Billy boy aside and said, "hey, a$shole, all rural India really needs is a self-contained, solar powered composting toilet in every home that costs less than 0.01-percent of what this asinine plan for an outrageous centralized sewage treatment facility."
That's just one example of how little these gods of humanity really understand the world around them.
And yet they keep spouting this narrative and people think that because they have more money than god, they must be doing something right.
Honestly, I do not understand why people buy into the narrative of people who are only interested in padding their already over-stuffed bank accounts - so much so that what we really have is corporate welfare in the US, and yet the worshipers are pi$$ing and moaning about programs that attempt to help people, not corporations, live better lives.
The more I think about it, the more it seems like the politicians and other blowhards who's pockets are padded by these corporations deliberately try to make out the social programs to be evil in order to deflect from the fact that what we really have in this country are those corporate welfare programs for companies, like crApazon, that have billions of dollars sitting in a bank account somewhere.
I do not understand why the people at the base of the tree worship the birds that are in the branches above them that continuously sh!t on them.
Last edited:
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
Which is very odd given that wealth is just a tool, not a goal. My great grandfather always told me to think not on how much money a man has in his wallet but instead on how he decides to use it. There have been countless philosophers that have mused over the psychosis the overly wealthy dip themselves into.
Well if you think on it for a hot second: How do these multi-billionaires obtain their wealth? Often times it's by being ruthless, paying their workings less, cornering the market, jacking up drug prices on essential medical drugs, and other ethically dubious means. The way America's capitalist system is currently set up, it's very hard to be a good wealthy person because every step of the way the system is conditioning you to be the biggest jerk you can be. From the society itself being conditioned to accept the rich as the best of America ("they create jobs!" sort of defenses) to the system itself granting them privileges far beyond the common man. Of course, you also have to consider just how vast current billionaire's wealth is. Just think what kind of a person you have to be to treat your workers like Jeff Bezos does, all the while spending more on pet projects then the hundreds of thousands you employ. We are talking about people who obtained money on a gross scale and are long past the point of understanding.
Well actually social welfare programs serve two purposes for paid politicians and their owners.
1. They provide an enemy in the common man. First, the wealthy (including companies of course) turn their paid pet politicians on the system to throw wrenches in the gears and then have their mouthpieces decry how poorly the system works and how the poor are lazy and exploitative. This point is three fold, in one stroke you make social programs and the poor look bad all the while exuding the principle that the rich are smarter then the rest of us.
2. Welfare serves as a buffer against revolution. The plebs need their bread and circuses. Providing the bare minimum to keep them minimally content is a efficient method to increase their wealth without having to go through nasty reforms. In fact, if you read a lot of history, Aristotle was commissioned by the wealthy of Greece to create a government that would most benefit them. The system he recommended most included welfare because he knew that without it the stability of the system would not last. You'd be relying on the generosity of the wealthy and history has shown that any system that is open to abuse will be abused.
That's more or less been the republican playbook since Reagan. They found a way to pick the middle class's pocket and have them believe it was the beggar next to them.
I’m not sure if you’ve experienced US internet before - because that statement is very broad.. and untrue.
I have been in the UK for a very extended period of time as an American, and while UK’s mobile data speeds are in fact overall better than the US, broadband speeds are noticeably inferior.
I don’t have a data cap at my house in the states, and I pay ~57GBP per month for 500/500 connection speeds.
Don’t generalize too hard there...
captaincranky
Posts: 19,690 +8,832
FWIW, I think Finland is the poster country for Bernie's and FDR's approach.
It has to be said, their tax rates are approaching 50%, yet they're still quite happy with the results.
I think I read somewhere recently that in one Scandinavian country it costs about $70.00 to have a baby.
American professionals are greedy beyond reason. However, the price of education and housing greatly exacerbate that fact.
Then there is the corruption:
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-pmn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/52DAD3RADZE5DEOKJRAPLRG634.jpg)
Another day in Pennsylvania, another indicted politician. Why it’s important to not shrug this off. | Editorial
By engaging in corruption, officials like Rep. Movita Johnson-Harrell show a complete indifference to the issues that are impacting the lives of constituents.
www.inquirer.com
I think her "taking the garb", should be emblematic of her absolute trustworthiness... ot not.
And then there's this
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-pmn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/BQOEPY3IARDS7K7CLX2MVN47DM.jpg)
Philly DA Seth Williams pleads guilty, goes to prison
As U.S. marshals surrounded Williams, his ex-wife - one of the only family members in the room - broke down in tears.
www.inquirer.com
If I say any more, everybody will think I"m racial profiling...
....I would never do such a thing...
Last edited:
Morris Minor
Posts: 249 +171
as an English man I disagree, the US is the best thing we created. I can only dream we will be as free as them.You can say what ever you want but UK is a better country to live in ( for now) that USA Brexit might change that but we just have to wait and see, and just FYI I'm not even British, I'm Polish living in Scotland since 2006
brucek
Posts: 1,744 +2,724
The cable companies are often monopolies granted by municipal law, where no one else is allowed to run coax to the home. Even where competition is not prohibited by law, it is common sense that it will generally not be economically viable to run multiple sets of wires to the home, nor attractive for the neighborhood to have even more wires overhead. Land line telephone, power, and water are typically monopolies for the very same reasons.
What's been different is that in most places local government has not regulated the ISP monopoly with the same oversight it gives to power and water. All that's needed is the same common sense approach and we'd be fine.
What's been different is that in most places local government has not regulated the ISP monopoly with the same oversight it gives to power and water. All that's needed is the same common sense approach and we'd be fine.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
FWIW, I think Finland is the poster country for Bernie's and FDR's approach.
It has to be said, their tax rates are approaching 50%, yet they're still quite happy with the results.
I think I read somewhere recently that in one Scandinavian country it costs about $70.00 to have a baby.
American professionals are greedy beyond reason. However, the price of education and housing greatly exacerbate that fact.
Then there is the corruption:
Another day in Pennsylvania, another indicted politician. Why it’s important to not shrug this off. | Editorial
By engaging in corruption, officials like Rep. Movita Johnson-Harrell show a complete indifference to the issues that are impacting the lives of constituents.
I think her "taking the garb", should be emblematic of her absolute trustworthiness... ot not.
And then there's this
Philly DA Seth Williams pleads guilty, goes to prison
As U.S. marshals surrounded Williams, his ex-wife - one of the only family members in the room - broke down in tears.
If I say any more, everybody will think I"m racial profiling...
Yes corruption is a big problem. The best way to combat it is: Education, political activism, and of course building the system itself well. I don't think it's any small coincidence that the rise of corporate power and poorly working government programs directly correlate to American's increasing apathy towards voting or politics in general. I appreciate a good political talk nowadays (whether I agree with that person or not) when I can because there are so few people who want to broach the topic. Education is the 2nd part of this. In the modern world it is becoming increasingly more difficult to discern true and false. People need to be given the right tools to investigate sources. In connection with that, something needs to be done with "news" platforms like facebook that are gateways for foreign propaganda. IMO platforms like that shouldn't be hosting "news" at all, no matter the content. I believe a platform needs some level of credentials in order to propagate something the masses will consume.
Where I live, Specturd could give a
Fortunately, for us, there's a local company installing fiber. It is supposed to be installed by February of 2020. When its installed, I drop Specturd, and flush them down the toilet - permanetly. Many of my neighbors on the street will also be dropping Specturd. The fiber service starts at $50/mo for 500 M-bit down and 50 M-bit up - no data caps. Specturd is probably laughing at the local company, but sooner or later, my bet is Specturd will be begging for customers to come back to them. I will squarely raise my middle finger at them if they do.
For me it was a different experience. We got upgraded to 100mbit initially then 200mbit for base speeds. Everyone got upgraded. Not just a handful of people and new customers. Initially I had to call and ask about it but it didn't take but 15 mins at most. The second time around happened on its own. I recently moved and had to cancel my service prior to doing so. Restarted it and now I have 200mbits once again but am only paying $44.99 a month locked for 2 years. I am going to take make a wild guess and say that Spectrum used to be Time Warner in your area in the past. Here Spectrum used to be known as Charter.
Well, for a start, "every American household" will not have affordable BB or even any BB within a few years, for the same reason as Ireland hasn't had it, despite our National Broadband Plan aiming to do exactly that - some households are just so remote that it's not worth running miles of cables just to reach 1 or a few houses. So he should be saying "every*" where * is probably 90%.
Even then, capitalism and corruption will ensure that it's nowhere near 90% and nowhere near affordable.
The biggest recent improvements in broadband availability, speeds and competitive prices in Ireland came when a new company called SIRO sprang up offering 1 Gbps BB over the electricity lines. And that had very little to do with the government's plans.
Even then, capitalism and corruption will ensure that it's nowhere near 90% and nowhere near affordable.
The biggest recent improvements in broadband availability, speeds and competitive prices in Ireland came when a new company called SIRO sprang up offering 1 Gbps BB over the electricity lines. And that had very little to do with the government's plans.
So, want's states and government to provide internet? I'm for breaking up monopolies and creating competition in the market... But like most things provided by the government, and those contracted by government, it's going to turn to ****. Especially when you live in a state like Illinois. The government needs to stop getting into the business of providing services and just govern those who do to play fair.
Slappy McPhee
Posts: 273 +177
The problem with this perspective is that the capitalist nature of the medical and even educational conglomerates would most likely stay intact. This means higher taxes along with the fact that these corporations still will get their cash they want from the general populace as well. Then there is also the privacy issues involved in having federal data programs. People already use VPNs now on a regular basis. I wouldn't doubt it if internet access became federalized in the United States that they would ban VPNs as well.
treetops
Posts: 3,064 +784
And then there is the problem of people who live out in the middle of nowhere, it's just not worth it for a company to run line out to your house, why so they can beat out dsl and get your $100 a month. Or say you live in a small town, that town has to approve all those new lines. They will not approve new telephone poles. Current poles are rented out. Fiber is the new thing now and it is very costly.
This article sums up what I've kinda been told. I actually thought it was more expensive to run fiber. 20k per mile.
https://www.otelco.com/fiber-infrastructure/
Some good news though, about 20 cities will start broadcasting 4k content in 2020.
Really though I think people would rather have faster internet then a wall on the Mexican border. Wouldn't it be nice if that was something we could simply vote on.... Without any middleman. Maybe one day some country will make a government for the people by the....
This article sums up what I've kinda been told. I actually thought it was more expensive to run fiber. 20k per mile.
https://www.otelco.com/fiber-infrastructure/
Some good news though, about 20 cities will start broadcasting 4k content in 2020.
Really though I think people would rather have faster internet then a wall on the Mexican border. Wouldn't it be nice if that was something we could simply vote on.... Without any middleman. Maybe one day some country will make a government for the people by the....
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
Latest posts
-
EA wants to place ads in full-price games, again- Anton Longshot replied
-
OpenAI considers letting users create AI-generated porn- Dimitriid replied
