The easiest way to get the world’s standard of broadband is to learn from the success stories of any areas in the world that demonstrate excellence in penetration of broadband. The stats are already collected. We just need to identify the leaders and allow them to show us how they did it.

First of all, Capitalism is a very broad sweep of basically every western economic system. Capitalism is generally known as a economic system that is run by private individuals though a Market Economy. The U.S.A uses a Mixed Economy which is close but has distinct differences such as the regulation of goods by the government and the redistribution of wealth such as welfare.
I wish that we had a capitalistic government based on a Market Economy. I believe there is way to much regulation by the federal government and that things such as welfare and socialized medicine are in most cases unwarranted.

THE SINGLE GREATEST PROBLEM WITH OUR COUNTRY TODAY IS THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS SLOWLY BUT SURELY TAKEN MORE AND MORE POWER FOR ITSELF. NOT ONLY BY TAKING POWER AWAY FROM STATE GOVERNMENT, BUT ALSO BY AWARDING ITSELF NEW AUTHORITY NEVER STATED BY THE CONSTITUTION.
One way the Federal Government does this is though grants awarded to states. If a state does not meet the regulations by the federal government they can be denied grant money. For example, did u know that the alcoholic drinking age is a state power, but for some reason every state has it set at 21. this is because of pressure by the federal government.

MARIJUANA WAS USED BY MANY OF OUR FOREFATHERS SUCH AS BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MADE IT ILLEGAL IN 1937 FOR REASONS THAT ARE NOT CONSTITUTIONAL, MANLY BECAUSE IT WAS HARD TO REGULATE AND THEY COULD NOT MAKE MONEY OFF IT. IF I WANT TO SMOKE WEED I AM GONNA DO IT!

I know my post is all over the board, but i would like to know what John Kerry thinks about these issues.

Importance

Democracy is at stake. Being the only uncensored means of high speed communication, it is the only place candidates and ballot measures have nearly equal footing for the public to experience what they’re about and make an informed vote.

Freedom is at stake. Through the internet you are free to express nearly anything you want to potentially anyone in the world, unbound by corporate suppression. True information, whistle-blowing, investigative reports and so on are necessities. Creativity, entertainment and cultural records are enriching. The ability for us to do EXACTLY WHAT WE’RE DOING NOW on this website is at stake.

Once again, community and human enlightenment are at stake. As with other means throughout history with which people gained new abilities to communicate and interact across previous barriers, we are at a point where the internet has the potential to let us realize how similar all our hopes and concerns are, how little we really need borders, and how once enough of us realize that - then it’s obvious that we can start making life better for everyone.

Solutions

Many years ago, a plan was called for and drawn up. It was said to be the most ambitious project ever attempted, the man who drew up the plans did not have confidence it could really be done. But the government was determined and the resources were allotted. The project was to build an Interstate Highway system.. and guess what - they succeeded. And with the exception of turnpikes, U.S. roads are free for everyone to use.

That’s how the “last mile” of internet should be - and CAN be. If all the necessary people in our government can ignore the corporate lobbyists for a minute and LISTEN TO US instead, they could see that we want this. They could pick a plan to do this and they could build what needs to be built for us to have free, nation-wide internet access.

People of government should realize that if they don’t listen to the citizens who elected them and are corrupted by corporate interests (who are by definition and legal charter, dictatorships with a single goal of monetary profit over all other concerns), THEIR VERY JOBS ARE AT STAKE. The system in which they’re employed as “public servants” will continue to slide into a republic not based on democracy but on despotism.. exactly the abuses of power that the U.S. rebelled against Britain for so many years ago.

So they need to take a new look at who they’re supposed to be serving (hint: us). They need to realize that if they save and expand the internet for all, they won’t NEED to be funded by corporate interests to appear on TV because people will get their information from the internet - and you won’t NEED millions of dollars to appear on the internet. You can campaign all you want on the net without spending much at all, and reach thousands, millions of voters without the TV and Radio networks chopping your message into half-second bites.

So if you don’t need millions of dollars to reach millions of voters, you don’t need corporate campaign funders looking for special favors.. and you can listen to who you’re supposed to be listening to, to make your decisions on what bills should pass and fail - the American People.

An economy based on fleecing citizens for corporate profit and fighting war is not sustainable. An economy based on bankers controlling all is not sound. A culture based on capitalism is not humane. We need to stop this direction while we still can, before it all comes crashing down.

The first place to start is with the last bastion of free speech, high-speed communication, and potential for true democracy - the internet. It can be the main conduit between the people and the government to get things on the right track.

Thank you,
Hoby Van Hoose

Reply Forward Invite Correspondence_Reply@allard.senate.gov to Gmail

to me

show details
Sep 12

Dear S:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns in regards to government regulation of the Internet. I appreciate you taking the time to write on such an important issue.

The Internet has been one of the leading technological advances of this generation. The network created between computers has reached into every part of our culture and changed the way we live, work, travel, shop, and socialize. The Internet is also one of the greatest examples of the ingenuity that has made the United States a perennial leader in technological advancement that is improving the quality of our lives and those around the world.

As a United States Senator, I believe I should help ensure that policies are in place to foster timely deployment of broadband to all sectors and geographical locations of American society. The current debate in the U.S. Congress and across the nation is concentrated on whether additional laws and regulations are needed to ensure the development of competition and its subsequent consumer benefits (often referred to as “net neutrality”), or conversely, whether more laws and regulations would be overly burdensome and discourage investment and deployment of such services. Congress should be careful in approving legislation without first examining its ramifications on economic growth, innovation, and market competition.

The Internet Freedom Preservation Act, Senate Bill 215, also addresses internet neutrality. This bill would prohibit broadband service providers from interfering with, or discriminating against, the ability of any person to use broadband service in a lawful manner. It also allows providers to engage in activities such as protecting network security and offering consumer protection services such as parental controls.

Please be assured that I will continue to work with my colleagues to help solve many of the challenges facing the American society in the age of continuing technological advances. I look forward to further debate should this legislation reach the Senate floor.

Thank you for writing to share your concerns. I look forward to hearing from you again. If you would like more information on issues important to Colorado and the nation, please log on to my website at http://allard.senate.gov.

Sincerely,

A

Wayne Allard

United States Senator

Dear Mr. ****:

Thank you for contacting me to express your views regarding Internet neutrality. It is good hearing from you, and I appreciate your patience while awaiting a response.

One of the difficult issues in addressing the question of “net neutrality” is that there is no single accepted definition of what that means. As a result, both sides of the argument claim to support net neutrality, and there is a fair amount of confusion as to what one means when they make that claim. Both sides agree that the owners of networks that compose and provide access to the Internet should not control how consumers lawfully use that network, and that they should not be able to discriminate against content provider access to that network. The question is how best to accomplish this.

Some advocates of legislation point to the need to head off the possibility of Internet providers using their position to control access, or to offer multi-tiered services, based on the level of payment. At present these are largely hypothetical situations. On the other hand, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) argues that it currently has the legal tools necessary to prevent these sorts of situations from occurring and for punishing those who attempt them.

If current law proves to be inadequate in preventing exploitation by Internet service providers or others, additional regulations can be implemented. I will carefully monitor this issue, and will keep your concerns in mind should related legislation come to the House floor for consideration.

Again, thank you for contacting me. If I can be of any assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to call on me. It is an honor serving you in Congress.

Sincerely,

Dave Weldon
Member of Congress

WhizKid says:

This boils down to political double talk in my opinion and I reject this argument.

I just wanted people to know what some represenatives are
doing to avoid making net neutrality a reality and what they are saying to their constituents.

Warm regards,

WhizKid