Net Neutrality … and Chicken Little

The sky is falling!  The sky is falling!!  AAAAHH!!!  The mountain of restrictive regulations written by Google, designed to benefit Google, and only Google (and stifle their competition) is finally going to be repealed, and idiots everywhere all think the sky is falling.

It’s amazing, the very people that this so-called “neutrality” hurts are the ones most against its repeal.  Seriously, how many times has the government EVER done anything right, except what it is constitutionally mandated to do (defend)?

Every time the government gets involved in the free market, they screw it up and make things worse, not better.  The very millennials crying in “safe zones” and screaming to the sky because Trump got elected now think they need protection from the big bad ISPs.  You idiots, ISPs get faster and better from competition.  They can’t just go blocking sites willy nilly without giving their competition ammunition to get their customers.

Everything these people claim will happen NEVER HAPPENED before net neutrality.  Even if some data carrier does it, you can just move to their competitor.  In other words, they won’t do it.

This is stupid.  I see prominent YouTube channels populated by people who I once thought had a brain, but now realize they are just convenient idiots.  Channels like:

• Angry Joe
• Linus Tech Tips 
• Computerphile (not as idiotic, but operate under the assumption government is needed for everything)

Now for some sanity:

• Sara Gonzales – The Blaze, a site that depends on the Internet.  You’d think if Net Neutrality was everything the Chicken Little’s say it is, they would be a big supporter of it.  No.
• Wonderful World of Stu – This was made BEFORE Net Neutrality was implemented, and it still applies.
• Ben Shapiro – Nobody says it plainer and simpler than Ben, and frankly, nobody has a chance debating Ben.  The guy is a genius.

Let me put it this way.  Let’s say you owned a small grocery store that needed to pay a trucking company to bring you goods once a week.  However, there’s this other very large chain that requires 1/3 of that trucking company’s total trucks every week to ship to them once a week.  But the “Trucking Neutrality” law forces the trucking company to charge you and them the same price.  What do you think the trucking company is going to charge you?  If you said a crapload more to make up for the windfall, then you would be right.  So instead of charging the large chain for the amount of trucks (which is common sense), they have to spread the costs to everyone, including you.  Who do you think that benefits most?  You guessed it, the large grocery store chain.

The same goes for Net Neutrality.  This is why Google wrote the regulations, because IT BENEFITS THEM the SAME WAY.  Frankly, if you use NetFlix a lot, then you should pay more than someone who only uses email or casually browses the web.

ISPs should be able to offer more options to those the use less and those that use more.  Frankly, rates would actually go down and speeds would go up.  It’s how it was originally.

I still think you’re a convenient idiot if you want Net Neutrality to stay.  It doesn’t benefit you, you’re a “small grocery store”.  You pay more because of it.