INDEX
- Vote 'NO!' to Government Regulation of Privacy at The Economist
- FCC Stalls on Internet Regulation; Asks for More Comments
- Why was the Volcker Commission Constrained by Obama’s Tax Pledge, but not the Simpson-Bowles?
- Daily Media Spotlight September 2, 2010
- Harry Reid Looks to Resurrect RES During Lame-Duck
- Calculating the Cost of Government (CFA Site »)
Thursday, September 2, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight September 1, 2010
-
Obama Tax Commission Report:
Baby Step Toward IRS Tax Preparation - Dina Titus Launches False Attack Ad on Joe Heck and the Taxpayer Protection Pledge
- Indiana LaunchesTransparency Website (CFA Site »)
- Rally for Jobs Kicks Off Today in Texas
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 31, 2010
- Let us All Join in on the NOT so “Green Cause”
- California Bag Ban Bill Up for Vote Today
- Norquist to Gov. Pat Quinn: Pick a Flawed Income Tax Hike and Stick With It
- Phil Moffett Signs Taxpayer Protection Pledge in Kentucky Gubernatorial Race
- New Mexico Sets Trends in Transparency Websites (CFA Site »)
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
- Robert Gibbs’s Fuzzy Tax Hike Math
- Daily Media Spotlight August 30, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
- 2011 Could Be Ugly for Nevada Taxpayers
- Lame Duck Governor Ed Rendell Not Going Gently Into That Good Night – New Call for Higher Taxes
- Happy Cost of Government Day, California
- Bay Staters Spent 239 Days Paying for Government Burdens in 2010 (CFA Site »)
- Washington Welcomes Cost of Government Day (CFA Site »)
Friday, August 27, 2010
- Spill Commission Should Lift Moratorium Which Has Cost Gulf Residents 12,000 Jobs and $2.1 Billion
- Daily Media Spotlight August 26, 2010
- Why is Dan Onorato Knowingly Misleading Pennsylvania Voters?
- Unions plan on spending big this election cycle
- Utah Tobacco Sellers Feeling the Impact of Tax Hikes
Thursday, August 26, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 25, 2010
- WI Democrats Launch “Blatantly False” Attack on Sean Duffy
- Unions plan on spending big this election cycle (AWF Site »)
- Philly's New Blog Tax May Foreshadow Other eTaxes
- BNA: For 14 States, Existing Tax Code Leaves Room for Etax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Philly's $300 Blogger Tax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Cost of Government Day Arrives in the Commonwealth
- Pennsylvania Finally Celebrates Cost of Government Day
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
- California Budget Proposal Advocates eTax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Daily Media Spotlight August 24, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 23, 2010
- Government Workers' Pensions are Underfunded by $3 Trillion
Monday, August 23, 2010
- Fourteen Ways to Reduce Government Spending
- FCC Report on Broadband Performance: A Scare Tactic
- Sen. Al Franken Doesn’t Understand Wireless Networks...or the First Amendment
Friday, August 20, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 19, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
How Google Profits From Net Neutrality
From Tim Andrews on Wednesday, October 28, 2009 5:20 PMTimothy Carney, writing in today’s Washington Examiner, examines the reasons why Google, who donated over $800,000 to President Obama’s campaign, is lobbying so heavily for net neutrality.
He begins with a an explanation of how the internet operates.
“Some companies make, gather or present digital stuff you want, including content (such as YouTube's videos), communication (such as the new Google Voice service) or applications (such as eBay's auction software). Other companies deliver these digital "goods" over wires or through the air to your computer or iPhone -- such as AT&T, Verizon or Comcast. In brief, there are content providers and there are networks.”
However, as more and more people are taking advantage of data intensive services, for instance watching live high-definition video online, there simply isn’t the infrastructure there to supply the demand.
Carney presents two solutions: “One solution: Just build massive amounts of new bandwidth [ed: and charge consumers!]. A better solution: Networks could build special "express lanes" for content that requires lots of bandwidth”. This next-generation smart technology would ensure faster internet, at lower costs. It is this express lane that net-neutrality would outlaw. As such, Google & others, who don’t want to pay anything to use the wires, are calling on the government to legislate to ensure their free-rider status: “It's comparable to a manufacturer lobbying for price controls on shipping companies”
Net neutrality will lead to higher costs, slower internet, and a worse online experience for households. It’s as simple as that .














Comments
Do you really think it's in Google's interest to have the internet be slower and have higher costs? Google's entire business strategy is to do whatever it can to get more people online easier, because when they go online they go to Google, and Google can show them ads (Andriod, Chrome, ChromeOS, Docs - all of them exist entirely to get people on the internet). If the conclusion that net neutrality laws lead to slower internet and higher costs is as simple and obvious as you make it seem, Google would come up with the same conclusion and would not be lobbying for those laws. Clearly you are missing something.
>> Matt Friday, October 30, 2009 3:34 PM Report Comment
The Net Neutrality advocates want to transform the internet into a public utility, managed by the governement. They want to create an environment where the government is forced to step in, build out networks, and nationalize the background. It's all right here: http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/246.php This is an interview with the founder of the Free Press, whose press secretary is now the FCC's press secretary. But the truth is, even Google is starting to worry that things are going to far. See this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/22/AR2009102204357.html
>> Max Power Friday, October 30, 2009 4:44 PM Report Comment
I DON'T TRUST THEM THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT PUBLICLY AND DENOUNCE THIS IF THEY DON'T THEY ARE FOR IT AND STAND TO PROFIT FROM IT.FOLLOW THE MONEY TRAIL.
>> Jean Monday, November 2, 2009 12:59 PM Report Comment