It is my understanding that allowing the continuation of net neutrality or its affirmation will destroy the smaller ISP's and create even bigger ISP corporations. That being said I can see that not having net neutrality could do the same thing as well as pricing rural areas out of the market.
That being said, I believe Google has plans to become the biggest ISP as they've shown with their push of google fiber. It suits them to create a system where no new ISP's can hope to ever enter the market. Net neutrality would help a bigger corporation such as google because they can afford to pay and buy up the smaller ISP's. The libertarian idea of more competition doesn't work when you have public utility level infrastructure that costs billions to install. Once google has a firm hold on the market I could see them lobbying against net neutrality as they have in the past.
Its an issue where I don't see a clear right answer. I favor whichever keeps internet cheap and fast. I also believe some of these issues could be addressed if we actually enforced anti-trust laws.
That being said, I believe Google has plans to become the biggest ISP as they've shown with their push of google fiber. It suits them to create a system where no new ISP's can hope to ever enter the market. Net neutrality would help a bigger corporation such as google because they can afford to pay and buy up the smaller ISP's. The libertarian idea of more competition doesn't work when you have public utility level infrastructure that costs billions to install. Once google has a firm hold on the market I could see them lobbying against net neutrality as they have in the past.
Its an issue where I don't see a clear right answer. I favor whichever keeps internet cheap and fast. I also believe some of these issues could be addressed if we actually enforced anti-trust laws.
"Boy ya'll want power, God I hope you never get it." -Senator Graham