In this video, I talk with libertarian superstar Jeffrey A. Tucker of Liberty.me and The Foundation For Economic Education to talk about his recent article 'Goodbye Net Neutrality; Hello Competition' which anyone in the political sphere would have a hard time avoiding.
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has announced that he wishes to do away with net neutrality and open up the market to competition. For years under Obama, the internet was kind of a socialist monopoly by the state via net neutrality where government regulated prices and monopolized major corporations. After Netflix recently decided to look towards private competition for better quality, this whole domino effect took the United States by storm.
As Jeffrey Tucker goes into, when you open up the market to competition, we see true innovation and eventually prices come down.
Interestingly many are terrified that this could lead to censorship and give too much power to major corporations. Well first off, if anyone's going to censor the internet, it's the government which via the hand of Google they already are with content from RT. If corporations censored content which they are likely to do all the same, in a free market, competitors step in with a censorship free platform and people move to that provider. You don't insult your customers on the free market.
Secondly, the notion that this gives a bunch of power to major corporations is simply not the case. The government has been giving corporations a major handout by monopolizing them under net neutrality rules for years and all the while, these corporations that people are concerned about are actually in support of net neutrality. Isn't that interesting?
The point is that when you want MORE you pay MORE in every industry except the internet for some reason. Well the internet is supposed to be the greatest example we currently have of freedom and we need to ensure we preserve that for future generations without state control and for that reason we must support the free market. With the free market comes competition, innovation, lower prices and far greater quality.
Jeffrey Tucker also dug into the recent Bitcoin rally as it nears $10,000 USD.
See the FULL video report here:
We appreciate Jeffrey's time! Stay tuned for more from WAM! Don't forget to Upvote & Follow!
If you like what I do, you can donate to my Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash or Dash addresses below! Especially as YouTube demonetizes this content as "hate speech."
Bitcoin:
Bitcoin Cash:
Dash:
I would like to make a few points. Will use Netflix for reference to points as that is most relevant since they were huge fighters against this.
The amount that this post really needs right now is more than I should give but we will see where this goes.
Can you explain to me how the regulations put forth onto the ISPs stemmed free market or monopolized them?
It does not make sense to me that people think it is okay for our ISPs to control the traffic of the internet. You state that the free market will just create a new ISP that does not block your website you'd like to go to. Unfortunate I don't think you understand how centralized the backbone of our internet is.
I pay my ISP from throughput. My ISP leases lines from another ISP, who leases lines from another ISP, and eventually it all leads back to about 4 companies. We are LEASING those lines under contract for a specific amount of bandwidth. The big Service providers that are hurt by these regulations, the one's who want to charge Netflix for more money, essentially triple dipping since they already bill both sides anyway.
It can actually create new monopolies. How are new services run out of basements on home servers ever going to grow if they do not have the ability to spend millions and bribe AT&T to have a connection that is as fast and reliable as YouTubes. By not having these specific blocks in place, it could negatively affect the ability for new innovation on the internet.
So, maybe you don't like the current ideas. Do you have other ideas on how to protect users when about 4 companies own the backbone in America. Which means they would have the ability to throttle and control traffic as they see fit to make as much profit as they can. While taking huge tax breaks because, and I paraphrase, "We provide a public service with our fiber lines."
How is someone in the Corn Fields of Illinois ever going to get a new Service Provider that doesn't block their services when everything leads back to the same source.
For real though, I am interesting in your response! Ready to learn!
Interesting. You made me realize why we need to end net neutrality. Let the free market do its thing. The Free Market is a beautiful thing that gets ruined by government intervention and crony capitalism. Thanks for the share.
It is a cruel idea when everything is controlled by the state. I dont want this!
Thanks for watching! It's important people understand these market fundamentals. People tend to pick and choose when it comes to the markets but the truth is, regardless of the industry the free market is always right as the individual is always right. The government always has an agenda when regulating such an industry and it's a great reason why all of these companies people are worried about SUPPORT net neutrality to begin with.
Have a great day!
only works on paper. In reality monetarism and collusion are bed fellows. 3000 years of monetary history proves it. Fiat money just makes it worse.
Hayek knew this and conceded that some kind of basic income would be necessary. Following the money causes collusion/monopolies due to the velocity of money.
http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2012/05/hayek-enemy-of-social-justice-and-friend-of-a-universal-basic-income/
I'm not sure that I'm on board with UBI...if people get money for nothing, that will lead to a lazy society. What would be the incentive for them to work harder/smarter? Also, you are making more people dependent on government, which in turn gives the government more power. I am all about limiting government power. UBI sounds too Socialist for my liking.
What does them make it today?
What does multimillionäre 80 year old not stop working?
What does musicians make music, even if they have to take a full job to finance that?
What makes people work FOR FREE nearly as often as for money (if they aren't already exhausted from a 50 hour minimum wage job)
The 80 year old became a multimillionaire because he is either a hard, smart worker, or a bit lucky, but did not depend on UBI or the government for a handout
The musician is not marketing herself well enough, or is dependent the other job for income, or the music is just a hobby/passion
People can do charitable things or work pro bono if they so choose...that is their right.
We can play these scenarios all day...I'm just not an advocate for people being dependent on the government and I am not a fan of handouts and free market manipulations. If you want those Socialist things...go to Venezuela.
Right, he most likely depended on a big inheritance. Or maybe an incredible amount of luck - as you can see at the big amount of people who are smart, work hard, and don't ge to be millionaires.
But that is besides the point, don't run away!
All those people work even if they don't have to. And often having to work for your living prevents people from really working. If Bill Gates or Steve Wozniak had been poor blacks that needed to feed their mother, I am quite sure the computer world would look quite different.
So you prefer people being depending on Companies that don't care a shit about them, not least because you can't fight back?
you cant have universal basic income without monetarism....
UBI has to be a government administered program, ergo theft from others to redistribute, as they see fit.
Recipients of UBI would just become sheep to government. drip drip drip. wither wither wither
Free stuff kills the spirit, the soul, and brings out the worst qualities in the human condition.
Striving brings out the best.
(hence the luxury we have here... of the electric, computers, and internet we are using right now.)
money doesn't cause collusion/ monopolies - governments do.
youtube would demonetize there first born if any words were not to there liking
Baby's first words, "freedom!"
DEMONETIZED!
No doubt!!!!
Hi joshsigurdson,
Thanks for the great content
Net neutrality has always been a good concept, but sadly it has never been implemented. No matter what, the safety of people in the real world will always trump the safety of people online and until there is a paradigm shift, that will never change. Anything you do online will always be stored somewhere, whether it be simply meta data or incriminating evidence, no one is safe and nothing you ever do online is safeguarded
70% of jobs will require computer skills in the US by 2020. Real computer skills come from your ability to research and stay focused on your task at hand. So many jobs I hear of countless repetitive work that is either keeping you at the computer sitting too long or lack of service and quickness holds you back. Either way, I think we should be focused on the important ways in which we use the computer. That can never be lost but I'm sure we can do without all the time-consuming apps. Youtube, Google, and even Instagram can be very useful for research and information if used properly. When I'm on the computer, it's researching my field, my interests, making connections with others, and using all it's fantastic tools that come with production, presentation, and analyzation of whatever you want to create. Thank you for posting about this topic!
This battle was won but I feel the war is still going on. Thanks for your partake in this battle of freedom :)
The idea that net neutrality could be abolished is terrifying to me.
Personally, I believe that net neutrality is extremely important and that doing away with it will be harmful in the long run. That being said, I don't fully agree with title 2 either. I would like to keep the internet under title 2 as a temporary fix and then see tailored legislation that is acceptable for the modern era to maintain net neutrality while also allowing competition between internet service providers.
This is the best Debate and has taken me out of my extremist anarchy view.
Net neutrality protects individuals from evil companies and governments.
It took me a minute to get over the bling, but this guy knows his shit. Great debate for net neutrality and why it needs to stay. Who is he?
Richard Heart. he has the same winning debate against Roger Ver regarding B-Cash
Who enforces the net neutrality?
The FCC(Federal Communication Commission)
Congratulations @joshsigurdson, this post is the sixth most rewarded post (based on pending payouts) in the last 12 hours written by a Hero account holder (accounts that hold between 10 and 100 Mega Vests). The total number of posts by Hero account holders during this period was 258 and the total pending payments to posts in this category was $3892.89. To see the full list of highest paid posts across all accounts categories, click here.
If you do not wish to receive these messages in future, please reply stop to this comment.
I resteamed to my wall. Lets keep freedom open for business.
wow.its a great post.keep it up
your video related with politics but i not interested to it...
So that means more startups, more interesting apps, less corporate ruling class controling all the other users....
After youtube deleted my account I'm here for ever. No more google. Free market is here. By the people for the people.✌✌
Great video and very educative discussion. Thank you for sharing Jeffrey Tucker"s thoughts.
u-um... it only can happen by inflation of the money supply, or bogus claims to justify a price hike. The quest for profits kills integrity in the long run. My blog exposes the full picture.
Just like paying more for organic food: you want more of your life, you pay more??? Thats a dangerous slope, really.
This quote is excellent for the headline of my next blog :)
정말 유익한 정보네요~
I am a huge fan of the free market and that if sorts things out best.
It's just seems like yesterday the people took to the streets to protest SOPA and won. Now they beg government to regulate the internet. The propaganda is strong.
Net Neutrality is the regulation that a multitude of entities that have "more money" as their only target cannot regulate what you see on the net.
Thats all, and I gladly take that "regulations", which is the net equivalent of the first amendment - it forbids gatekeepers to close their gates to whatever they want.
You wouldn't say the free market should regulate free speech and let's take away that piece of regulatory shit, would you?
usefull post and cryptocurrency news
But this wallet has you?
Great news! Finally the companies can milk out money of you for using youtube, for using twitter, for using steemit, every site only 10$!
And there will even be a free speech packet - get all the news and social media for only 25$!!
I’ve always thought the way net neutrality was written out wasn’t the best way of dealing with it. The government always uses scare tactics to get people to willingly give them more power that they don’t need. I’m interested to see how this whole situation plays out!!
The solution to shit laws aren't no laws, it's better laws
The law is an opinion with a gun. How good, bad or better of an opinion someone may have is irrelevent for me personally, just get the gun out of my face.
Heloo, nice video and very interesting !
Finally, a well informed argument for the other side! Very intriguing article
YES❗️COMPETITION IS THE WAY TO PROSPERITY ❗️👏👍 I remember when some idiots on MSM said this was just a trend . 🤣😂 Mankind never thrives more than when they are FREE , and PROSPEROUS . TRUMP may be a bigoted asshole , but he is also a businessman . And right now what we need is PEACE , and PROSPERITY . Great show 👍👏
Congratulations, your post received one of the top 10 most powerful upvotes in the last 12 hours. You received an upvote from @thejohalfiles valued at 89.13 SBD, based on the pending payout at the time the data was extracted.
If you do not wish to receive these messages in future, reply with the word "stop".
I don't see this as a good thing, especially for small businesses, e-commerce sites that are trying to start up, even miners that are trying to start up. bandwidth prices will be a la cart, which may seem like competitive "freedom," but that freedom only applies to the ISPs and cellular providers.
"Net neutrality is actually a massive government regulation that benefits the large corporate players"
Oh yeah I guess that's why these large corporate players are the ones lobbying to remove it. You mention that it benefits Yahoo, but if that was true, then why would Tumblr (owned by Yahoo) be removing posts supporting net neutrality? Or why would Yahoo's parent company have a record of violating net neutrality and trying to have it removed? Fair treatment of data by the government is just as essential to freedom in this digital era as fair treatment of people by the government.
Government regulating free individuals is not essential to freedom, it's the opposite. Follow the money, we named countless examples of companies who are in support of net neutrality and those happen to be the major players being monopolized by the system. Yahoo is hardly a concern. Their days are 20 years behind them for the most part.
You are right that governments regulating individuals is against freedom, but this is not what net neutrality is. Money is perhaps the biggest corrupter in human history, and big businesses are built on it. They will always want more and more, even if this doesn't directly translate to a happier customer. They will split up websites into packages, throttle our connections and claim you're not on the "internet fast lane" just to get another buck out of us. It would be as if your electric company offered you a separate package for each room in your house and you had to buy the most expensive one to get power to your entire house. You might be fine with that because you can afford it. I wouldn't be even if I could.
I'm not necessarily for a bigger government. That leaves the door just as open to corruption as it is now. I'd be very happy if the government was but a verifiable distributed rule set. But for everybody to be free, we must not be allowed to hinder that right for others less it eventually happen to us, too.
I came here to listen to opposition of my own beliefs ... wasn’t disappointed
Even without knowing much about the ISP business it seems clear that simply removing net neutrality is not going to improve competition. Established companies do not push for changes that increase competition.
What is needed are regulations that mandate sharing of network infrastructure. That would create healthy competition. It’s working in South Korea, the country with the fastest internet.
And no, we do not know what the market will produce will be better than government regulation. All that we do know is that a pseudo-monopolistic industry will get to operate with fewer regulations. And it will behave like any other unregulated monopoly, which is poor service and high prices – i.e. the same only more.
The problem is these ISP corporations are monopolies, there will be no competition for them, because in a free market the biggest corporation always wins, because they use their money to buy out their competition or price them out of the market.
So when net neutrality ends, there will be no competition because monopolies dont allow competition. Instead they will charge users more for internet access and control what users are allowed to look at on the internet.
Twitter and Facebook are private corporations that already do this, they can block content or users they dont like. When Net Neutrality ends ISPs will be able to do the same thing, they can block websites they dont like from being viewed by their users.