Who do you side with?

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Naive as fuck lol.

 

There are only two ISPs around here and both of them have done this in the past. ISPs are not like a normal business, there is very little competition.

A couple of things. Firstly, there is no reason to be rude.

 

Secondly, let's say I concede to you that in your area there is very little competition for internet -- as areas do vary greatly (a 2010 study showed 60% of fixed broadband users had at least 3 ISP choices, and 90% of mobile broadband users had the same number of choices or more)

 

. What do I say then? Easy. A lack of competition drives prices up. You'd be better off with more competition, would you not? Yes, indeed... Which means you don't want government regulations coming in and taking out the little guys that will help drive your prices down and give you options.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Favre4Ever

[theMileHighGuy 656]

If "the government doing what they please" means keeping bandwidth neutral, and not charging me 10 bucks a month to watch youtube, then sign me up.

 

There is no real competition as far as ISPs go in the united states. Especially not in the scale required to actually make any kind of meaningful difference for the average person.

 

What's the point of having cheaper monthly internet payments when they can make you pay an extra premium to use the most popular sites, and you better believe that they will when that bill allows them to.

 

It's just not right. It's selling the internet to the highest bidder.

[Cherry 1,302]

In most circumstances I would argue that the free market would resolve its own issues, but in the case of ISPs I'm a little bit unsure. The internet is more of an inelastic good than it is elastic, as there is no viable substitute. Unless the government steps in to limit what ISPs do there is going to be a problem. The consumers need the internet so bad that they'd deal with outrageous prices and endless bullshit for service. The same thing happens with phone companies where you're stuck in a long-term deal because there is nobody offering what's good for the consumer.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Also, government intervention is the only reason time warner and comcast are two separate companies.

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

In most circumstances I would argue that the free market would resolve its own issues, but in the case of ISPs I'm a little bit unsure. The internet is more of an inelastic good than it is elastic, as there is no viable substitute. Unless the government steps in to limit what ISPs do there is going to be a problem. The consumers need the internet so bad that they'd deal with outrageous prices and endless bullshit for service. The same thing happens with phone companies where you're stuck in a long-term deal because there is nobody offering what's good for the consumer.

 

This. I only have 2 options for broadband here in Fort Myers, CenturyLink (which is slow as fuck) and Comcast (fast but terrible customer service and they still try to charge me for renting their modem when I bought my own modem two years ago.) So it's basically a case of do I want fast internet but be annoyed 5 months out the year when they charge me for shit I don't even have? Or have shitty internet?

 

Terrible.

 

I mean look at this shit:

 

 

EDIT: ACTUALLY... just realized I DON'T EVEN HAVE TWO BROADBAND OPTIONS BECAUSE CENTURYLINK IS FUCKING DSL....

 

Even worse.

 

This isn't a town or a small city either, there's 800k people (was 645k back in 2009 so I"m being extremely generous with that population quess) that live in the Cape Coral-Fort Myers Metropolitan Area too. One fucking broadband option. ONE.

Edited July 7, 2015 by CampinWithGoatSampson

[seanbrock 1,684]

What a simplistic view JD has of net neutrality. Bigger companies with more capital would run the smaller companies out of business and either buy them out or let them die, by offering better prices in some area's, incentives for switching to a faster service and then be able to do whatever they wanted once they had the market cornered. They could also, like others have been saying partner with or buy websites and online services and give them better bandwidth with better prices until they had the market cornered. Like blots pointed out, Time Warner and Comcast would be one company if the government didn't get involved. It's like the fucking Walmart/Lowes/Home Depot effect on a community but much, much, much worse and harder to get around because it's a lot easier to open up a grocery store or a hardware store than it is to become an ISP.

 

oh and apparently I'm 93% in line with Bernie Sanders "Feel the Bern." 77% in line with what Hillary Clinton SAYS she believes in but come on,who i she kidding and Rand Paul comes in at 53%

Edited July 7, 2015 by seanbrock

[RazorStar 4,025]

Coming from a canadian, I don't know if the results are any more interesting, but here's what I've got.

 

Bernie Sanders 95%

Hilary Clinton 82%

Martin O'Malley 64%

Rand Paul 51%

 

And the rest are negligible.

[Bucman 891]

I matched Rand Paul at 90% which is about right. 2nd was Jeb Bush at 86%.

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

Mine's basically a wash

 

Bernie Sanders 81%

Hillary Clinton 76% (shudders)

Rand Paul 73%

Marco Rubio 73%

 

If you can't tell I'm a pretty "moderate" guy, I don't sway too far either way.

Edited July 7, 2015 by CampinWithGoatSampson

[theMileHighGuy 656]

I wanna bump this thread, as it rather re-opened my eyes to something that I've known for a long time, but don't often so plainly see in practice. I was more or less shook by the number of people with incredibly strong conservative leanings, some that I would have never guessed by talking to them in the day to day.

 

It boggles my mind how people, especially young people, can idealize so similarly with people who want to run the country like it's 1958. People who will put the absurdly rich of the this country on a pedestal above all others. People who feel it is their right to tell other people what they can and can't do with their bodies. People who will put a white man over every other combination of race and gender. People who live their lives through and want to shape our laws via a set of writings that was written by MEN some 3500 years ago.

 

You can argue that these things aren't true about all of the far right, or even the mid right folks in power on capitol hill, but most of them in fact are. Rand Paul and Jeb Bush aren't going to come out and announce that they're racist or religion biased, but they are. However, I'm not even mad at them, or the people that follow them. You might not be or support any of the awful things I mentioned in the previous two paragraphs, but you do support people that do, and I will continue not to understand that.

 

My point is - is that this is what makes us human. Everyone is different, and it's hard to imagine how we all got this way. Even the people who agree with my personal points of view are different than me in some ways.

 

Sorry for the rant. This all came about after hearing of some shit that went down in Washington a few days ago and seeing these memes and videos popping up.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMfuD0bsheU

 

Just seems so heartless. Like I said, you might not be heartless, but you support people that are, and I just can't see it.

Edited July 20, 2015 by theMileHighGuy

[Bucman 891]

Bernie means socialism so fuck that.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Bernie means socialism so fuck that.

 

Oh god if you're serious.

 

Please define what socialism is.

 

People use it as a buzzword and have no fucking clue what it is.

 

@MHG: Stevo, Vin and Favre are the only ones with high conservative scores as their main ones. Favre being conservative is kinda obvious. Vin and Stevo are high on Rubio apparently.

 

Your post kinda implies that Democrats are any better, which they really aren't, nor are Rand Paul or Jeb Bush racist. Sure they both pander to religion, but that is because a large part, probably 70%+ of the Republican party are religious. It would be political suicide not to.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Thanatos19

[SteVo+ 3,702]

@MHG: Stevo, Vin and Favre are the only ones with high conservative scores as their main ones. Favre being conservative is kinda obvious. Vin and Stevo are high on Rubio apparently.

 

Many know this from my political posts in 2012, but we have a lot of new guys since then, so, for the record: I am a registered Republican but very much moderate. Socially liberal, fiscally conservative, dissatisfied with the status quo, voted for Gary Johnson in the last election. So yeah, another one of those libertarian assholes.

[Cherry 1,302]

Rand hasn't let his religion interfere with his politics, so I really couldn't care less how he feels about LGBT and other minority groups. Bernie's method to economics is downright pointless for the most part. I support helping the poor as much as possible, but raising the minimum wage doesn't achieve that. Unless there is a complete redistribution of wealth via tax incentives and government regulation, it's just not gonna happen.

[Vin+ 3,121]

 

Oh god if you're serious.

 

Please define what socialism is.

 

People use it as a buzzword and have no fucking clue what it is.

 

@MHG: Stevo, Vin and Favre are the only ones with high conservative scores as their main ones. Favre being conservative is kinda obvious. Vin and Stevo are high on Rubio apparently.

 

Your post kinda implies that Democrats are any better, which they really aren't, nor are Rand Paul or Jeb Bush racist. Sure they both pander to religion, but that is because a large part, probably 70%+ of the Republican party are religious. It would be political suicide not to.

 

To be fair, Bernie self-identifies(ied?) as a democratic socialist. Which is funny, because people harped on the Pres. for being socialist when he isn't, but yet when there's a candidate who actually identifies as one, no one cares. Maybe it's just because he isn't a huge name yet, I dunno.

 

And I don't really have any intention of voting for Rubio. It just so happened that he's the one who I lined up with the most.

[theMileHighGuy 656]

 

Oh god if you're serious.

 

Please define what socialism is.

 

People use it as a buzzword and have no fucking clue what it is.

 

@MHG: Stevo, Vin and Favre are the only ones with high conservative scores as their main ones. Favre being conservative is kinda obvious. Vin and Stevo are high on Rubio apparently.

 

Your post kinda implies that Democrats are any better, which they really aren't, nor are Rand Paul or Jeb Bush racist. Sure they both pander to religion, but that is because a large part, probably 70%+ of the Republican party are religious. It would be political suicide not to.

 

I woulda never pegged Bucman, Stevo, or Vin... well, maybe Vin as identifying Republican, that was my point. People being different, it's a beautiful thing.

 

Oh gosh, but they are... Rand has run with racist people (both politically and socially) since he was vying to become a senator. He's had to fire people from his staff to save face, even. Dude publicly criticized the Civil Rights Act ON TV! He has people on his staff right now supporting the confederate flag. You know what they say? "Where there's smoke there's fire". Well where there's fire there's fire lol.

 

Jeb isn't so bad as far as race goes, but with some of the bullshit he spouts about Obama it's hard to believe that he's not. He is easily one of the biggest anti-gay opponents there is though, and that's just as bad at least in my eyes.

 

At any rate, they're not good people. You can tell just by watching them talk that they're not. I don't get much better of a feeling from Hillary, but she's gotta be a helluva lot better than those two fucks, if solely for the fact it's not 'political suicide' for her to not govern via 100 year old values.

 

 

Rand hasn't let his religion interfere with his politics, so I really couldn't care less how he feels about LGBT and other minority groups. Bernie's method to economics is downright pointless for the most part. I support helping the poor as much as possible, but raising the minimum wage doesn't achieve that. Unless there is a complete redistribution of wealth via tax incentives and government regulation, it's just not gonna happen.

 

That's not true though :/

 

 

 

@SteVo - I voted for Michael Badnarik in 2004, and nearly voted for Gary Johnson in 2012

[Thanatos 2,847]

 

To be fair, Bernie self-identifies(ied?) as a democratic socialist. Which is funny, because people harped on the Pres. for being socialist when he isn't, but yet when there's a candidate who actually identifies as one, no one cares. Maybe it's just because he isn't a huge name yet, I dunno.

 

And I don't really have any intention of voting for Rubio. It just so happened that he's the one who I lined up with the most.

 

My point was missed I guess.

 

I think most people would agree with many facets of Bernie's socialism. Most people in my experience simply don't know what it is and their knee-jerk reaction is "socialism bad".

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

When comparing answers with Bernie, almost all of the ones I disagreed with were only slightly/my second choice.

 

Bernie Sanders: 86%

on immigration, environmental, domestic policy, and foreign policy issues.

 

Hillary Clinton: 83%

on social, immigration, foreign policy, domestic policy, and education issues.

 

Martin O'Malley: 65%

on immigration issues.

 

Jeb Bush: 63%

on immigration and economic issues.

 

Rand Paul: 52%

[Vin+ 3,121]

The last time we did this:

 

http://www.thegridironpalace.com/forums/index.php?/topic/60245-political-identification-quiz

[FartWaffles 1,857]

Marco Rubio: 82%

Rick Santorum: 81%

Ted Cruz: 76%

Mike Huckabee: 70%

Scott Walker: 70%

Rand Paul: 70%

[BwareDWare94 723]

Marco Rubio: 82%

Rick Santorum: 81%

Ted Cruz: 76%

Mike Huckabee: 70%

Scott Walker: 70%

Rand Paul: 70%

It takes balls to post percentages so high next to those names.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Why? He's just saying who the poll says he agrees with.

[FartWaffles 1,857]

It takes balls to post percentages so high next to those names.

Why? He's just saying who the poll says he agrees with.

Yeah, and honestly a lot of the issues I disagreed with the guys that got my top percentages for the most part are deal-breakers. I actually think Rand Paul is someone that fits my views more, regardless of what this poll says.

 

I'm not a very political person to begin with, and that's why you will rarely see me post around this section. I think the people lose no matter who they elect president, because these candidates don't know what the majority of the people they represent actually go through on a day-to-day basis. I'd feel more confident voting for any of you guys than I do for these elitist fucks.

[seanbrock 1,684]

Regardless of how you feel about Bernie Sanders' politics, he's like Ron Paul in the sense that he's principled and he truly believes in what he's doing. Obviously they're on opposite ends of the political spectrum but as men I think they're about the same. Bernie's not a liar and he's going to do everything in his power to do what he says he wants to do. I mean, what other candidate is really, truly trust worthy? I don't believe a word that comes out of any of their mouthes besides Sanders. He's not just trying to tell people what they want to hear. He's consistent and he actually talks about the issues. He doesn't just spout political hyperbole and buzz words.

Edited July 26, 2015 by seanbrock

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

Edited July 29, 2015 by CampinWithGoatSampson