FCC Wants To Tax Broadband

[mrjarrell]

The dolts at the FCC want to impose yet another tax on us. This time it's to promote the expansion of broadband. Of course some of the big corporations are for it, since they'll be the primary recipients of these stolen monies. They're doing this with as little fanfare as possible, so they can sneak it by in the middle of the night. If you don't want yet another tax you might want to let your congress critter know you're opposed to it and drop the FCC a line while you're at it.

FCC eyes tax on Internet service - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

 

[poptab]

I guess they want to make broadband unaffordable for the masses that way the only news they can get is the state approved propaganda.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I would suggest that we impose a tax on stupidity. That should be enough to make 90% of those affiliated with the .gov take off for Argentina.

 

[Double T]

They want to RAISE the tax, bc if I recall there already IS a tax on broadband.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Government's appetite is insatiable. Those 19 million people must get fast access to Facebook and YouTube. It's vital for the future prosperity of our republic!

The new fund aims to subsidize the construction of high-speed Internet networks to the estimated 19 million Americans who currently lack access.*

 

[NYFelon]

If there was a large enough market of users in these areas to make investment in a broadband infrastructure in these areas profitable, don't they think the ISPs would have already done so.

I can't take it anymore.

 

[rambone]

Doesn't this need to go through congress, not the stamp of some bureaucrat?

 

[foszoe]

The feds have been trying to tax and regulate the Internet ever since I filled my hard drive with napster stuff. I doubt they will ever stop until they either get their way or we wholesale clean the house out in DC

 

[churchmouse]

I would suggest that we impose a tax on stupidity. That should be enough to make 90% of those affiliated with the .gov take off for Argentina.

I am for this. Who gets to set the standards. I have some folks in mind.

 

[ssblair]

If there was a large enough market of users in these areas to make investment in a broadband infrastructure in these areas profitable, don't they think the ISPs would have already done so.

I can't take it anymore.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I am for this. Who gets to set the standards. I have some folks in mind.

Six blind, deaf, & dumb monks: Catholic, Buddhist, or Hindu or any combination thereof.

 

[churchmouse]

Six blind, deaf, & dumb monks: Catholic, Buddhist, or Hindu or any combination thereof.

That is who I had in mind. It would have to go better than the group calling the shots right now.

 

[Lex Concord]

The feds have been trying to tax and regulate the Internet ever since I filled my hard drive with napster stuff. I doubt they will ever stop until they either get their way or we wholesale clean the house out in DC

Expect a call from an RIAA attorney in 3....2.....1....

 

[jrogers]

If there was a large enough market of users in these areas to make investment in a broadband infrastructure in these areas profitable, don't they think the ISPs would have already done so.

I can't take it anymore.

Neither can I. If people thought this way back in the '30s huge swaths Appalachia would still be without electricity or phone service. Your beloved invisible hand is imperfect; occasionally the lust for profits must be trumped by the public interest.

 

[EOD Guy]

You would be surprised at what the FCC can do...they've already made billions when they forced the military to narrow their bandwidth so they could sell off public frequencies to the highest bidder.

These guys control everything from what freqs you can use, how many media outlets a company can have in a market, etc, etc, etc... Worst thing is these guys are in bed with the media. I think it was back in the 90's when they removed political regulations covering equal time/equal coverage....since then the media makes billions more on campaign advertising. I won't mention the FCC folks soon jumped ship and now make tons of cash working for media companies that benefited. Most of what Romney/Obama/Super PACs/Senate folks spend goes straight to the media...it's criminal.

 

[jrogers]

You would be surprised at what the FCC can do...they've already made billions when they forced the military to narrow their bandwidth so they could sell off public frequencies to the highest bidder.

Do you imagine that the FCC is a cabal who line their pockets with the proceeds from spectrum auctions? That money goes into public funds.

These guys control everything from what freqs you can use, how many media outlets a company can have in a market, etc, etc, etc... Worst thing is these guys are in bed with the media. I think it was back in the 90's when they removed political regulations covering equal time/equal coverage....since then the media makes billions more on campaign advertising. I won't mention the FCC folks soon jumped ship and now make tons of cash working for media companies that benefited. Most of what Romney/Obama/Super PACs/Senate folks spend goes straight to the media...it's criminal.

You seem aghast that the Federal Communications Commission regulates communication and completely misunderstand the nature of the Equal-Time Rule. Your claim that political campaigns and associated organizations spend the bulk of their funds on advertising is somehow "criminal" is baffling. What element of this constitutes a crime? How would you have them allocate their resources?

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Political speech is either "free" (in the sense that no one is allowed to regulate or censor it) or it isn't. "The Media" are in business to make profits; what they have to sell is advertising space. Political campaigns, just like any other business, are selling a product. Why should any restrictions be placed on their business advertising as opposed to any other business advertising?

 

[EOD Guy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EOD Guy
You would be surprised at what the FCC can do...they've already made billions when they forced the military to narrow their bandwidth so they could sell off public frequencies to the highest bidder.
Do you imagine that the FCC is a cabal who line their pockets with the proceeds from spectrum auctions? That money goes into public funds.

I understand these funds go into the federal kitty but my beef was with the FCC mandate for everyone to narrow their bandwidth. This caused a huge problem and cost time and money for the DOD when they had to reconfigure most freqs.

Also, the FCC doesn't line their pockets, FCC commissioners lines their pockets after a big media merger or shift in policy. Those same folks "resign" only to show up later working as a lobbyist for the same media company they benefited...now trying to persuade the next FCC commissioner with a big fat carrot.

http://benton.org/node/75741

The FCC ethical requirements are too lax and allow this culture to become tainted. It has become so bad that Congress is even trying to stop it...and you know these guys aren't proactive.

Proposed FCC 'reform' could temper its bite - Eliza Krigman - POLITICO.com

Federal Communications Commission Process Reform Act of 2012 (H.R. 3309) - GovTrack.us

Even the Congressional solution (if it passes the Senate) is only a one year delay...only a speedbump.

The FCC is in place to serve the best interest of the people...not help media direct dumptrucks full of cash.

 

[IndyDave1776]

That is who I had in mind. It would have to go better than the group calling the shots right now.

Six rocks would do better than the morons we have now.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Neither can I. If people thought this way back in the '30s huge swaths Appalachia would still be without electricity or phone service. Your beloved invisible hand is imperfect; occasionally the lust for profits must be trumped by the public interest.

From each according to his ability to each according to his need?