SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1937
Net neutrality advocates are planning two days of protest in Washington DC this month as they fight off plans to defang regulations meant to protect an open internet.
A coalition of activists, consumer groups and writers are calling on supporters to attend the next meeting of the Federal Communications Commission on 26 September in DC. The next day, the protest will move to Capitol Hill, where people will meet legislators to express their concerns about an FCC proposal to rewrite the rules governing the internet.
The FCC has received 22 million comments on "Restoring Internet Freedom", the regulator's proposal to dismantle net neutrality rules put in place in 2015. Opponents argue the rule changes, proposed by the FCC's Republican chairman Ajit Pai, will pave the way for a tiered internet where internet service providers (ISPs) will be free to pick and choose winners online by giving higher speeds to those they favor, or those willing or able to pay more.
The regulator has yet to process the comments, and is reviewing its proposals before a vote expected later this year.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @02:20PM (71 children)
The answer is the market: Organize yourself in ways that are demonstrably profitable and therefore self-sustaining; maybe it will be painful at first, but that is the only way to ensure that you'll get what you want.
Concretely: Quit running to daddy; build your own fucking networks.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @02:32PM (2 children)
The free market doesn't exist. The closest we've been to it in the past brought us charlatans and frauds and the race to the bottom. Go live in Somalia if you can't handle the truth. Maybe that will open your eyes.
Myth of the Free Market: http://robertreich.org/post/61406074983 [robertreich.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @02:40PM (1 child)
The Somalians new nothing of voluntary exchange before the failure of their, and nothing of it afterwards.
Yet, despite their culture of coercion which gave rise to warlords, the people's lives still improved immensely, because a market did develop where the authoritarians were too weak to control it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:50PM
Xeer [wikipedia.org] must be the model we're looking for. An overview:
Does that sound like it?
I wonder if it's possible to declare oneself an independent diyya group. Nothing gets under my skin more than being held accountable for the words and actions of others on a collective and several basis due to circumstance of birth.
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Wednesday September 20 2017, @02:34PM (2 children)
I liked where the OpenLibernet whitepaper (PDF) [openlibernet.org] was going, but it didn't go anywhere. I had minor objections, but I forgot them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @01:23PM (1 child)
Thanks for that post!
I just read it. It is a theoretical paper with a couple of econ equations. Not much in the way of networking in it. But its a start. Which is more than can be said for the whole of the telecom industry in the past decade.
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Saturday September 23 2017, @05:41PM
From my fading memory, that seems correct. There are meshnet papers that are more thorough (like CJDNS, which is a real system), but I don't know of any that propose incentives like the OpenLibernet paper does. I haven't searched for any in a while.
I like how everybody interpreted your original post as being enthusiastic about monolithic corporations developing their own proprietary balkanized networks, as if those wretched contraptions could successfully compete with open standards in the long run.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by canopic jug on Wednesday September 20 2017, @02:40PM (11 children)
The answer is the market.
Been there, done that. We already tried that in the 1970's and 1980's with a disparate assortment of private, incompatible, isolated networks. Remember Prodigy, CompuServe, Delphi, GEnie, and the others?
Apparently not.
They never could get it together to provide decent service or a decent price, let alone grow to any mentionable size. Interoperability and communications between those networks were not possible. Remember the Internet? Yep. You're still using it.
Guess which was organized by the government and which was left to the "free" market?
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @02:47PM (5 children)
There was long a clear need for hooking up geographically disparate computers.
Just because government threw a pittance at one particular low-level project means shit. It's a total misrepresentation of the history of the Internet.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:05PM (3 children)
Yet the "free market" couldn't figure out how to do it. It took government intervention to get it done. Funny how that works, isn't it?
Free market: 0. Government: 1.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:10PM (2 children)
Evolution by variation (supplier competition) and selection (consumer choice).
You're betraying your innate misunderstanding of this process; why are you so partial to the ridiculous theory of Intelligent Design?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:29PM (1 child)
Free market moron uses Red Herring! It's not very effective.
Anyway, "evolution" chose ARPAnet, the government system, over your free market systems such as Prodigy, CompuServe, Delphi, etc. that were mentioned earlier.
How long are you going to keep fighting a lost battle? Yes, it's a lost battle for you as evidenced by the tactics you just employed.
Or are you just a troll and I swallowed the bait hook, line, and sinker?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:25PM
So - you're a swallower? I've a few things I'd like to discuss with you in private . . .
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:36PM
Thank you this is an excellent post we will make sure you are well compensated for your shilling Anonymous Coward.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:41PM (2 children)
Not gonna argue, 'cause you are at least mostly right. But, is the internet still working because of "government", or because of "standards"? What I think is, today's standards were adopted readily, and widely, because government was using and backing them. But, government didn't exactly write the standards all on their own. It was more like a critical mass thing, where enough agencies, corporations, and people were on board with "The Internet", so everyone else just fell into line. It was a choice of "conform, or be left behind".
(Score: 5, Interesting) by canopic jug on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:07PM
It's definitely the standards. But I make a distinction between the first two phases of the Internet which were the pre-commercialization and the post-commercialization. The solid government period was pre-commercialization. That is to say pre-1996 it was guided by government projects. However, for all the shortcomings of that model back then there was still the possibility to bring in top experts and let them do their thing. Today, there are fewer experts and they would never be allowed to do anything without being micro-managed into unemployment by a gaggle of MBAs. Anyway, long and short of it was that there was a period of time when the standards that comprise(d) the Internet were made possible through the government.
I'm a middle-path fan, myself. Historically, it seems to be the only model that has consistently worked. However, we've already done the free-market experiment with networking in the 1970's and 1980's. It did not get anywhere. Nowadays we're in a third phase where the very standards themselves are under attack [boingboing.net] from the corporations because the lessions from past decades have not soaked in to the older generations and most of the younger generations don't even know what the WWW is let alone the Internet.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Wednesday September 20 2017, @09:17PM
There was a bit more to it. For example, one thing that has kept things somewhat open is carriers not wanting to be on the wrong side of liability by looking too closely at the data they carry. We need to be careful not to erode that fear of liability if we want to maintain a free internet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:08PM
Grammar National Socialism is the only legitimate form of government.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @06:55PM
it's not that simple. you're detailing a failure of proprietary shitware compared to a more open source approach. i doubt the fucking government helped anything.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @02:57PM (51 children)
We've tried that. Every time it happens the local cable and phone monopolies run crying to daddy government to buy laws to outlaw any challenge to their
business modelscam.(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @02:59PM (50 children)
Obviously, you net neutrality folks should be putting time into getting government completely out of the business of the Internet.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:16PM (17 children)
Now why would we do that? If there's no regulation whatsoever, there's nothing to keep you big business types from using monopoly tactics to squeeze out competition. I've never, ever seen you "free market" cunts scream about regulation when it helps to shut down municipal broadband. Not once. Municipal broadband is the very definition of that which you cling to, yet it's *crickets* from you whenever it comes under attack.
You actually WANT regulation, you just want it set up to only benefit YOU. I have only three words to say to that: Go, fuck, and yourself.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:23PM (3 children)
Regulation is what squeezes out the newcomer by making the barrier to entry that hurdle which a Big Business has already cleared.
Indeed, a government regulatory agency is itself a goddamn monopoly; you want a monopoly to protect you from monopolies—it makes no sense!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:46PM (2 children)
Yes, I want a monopoly controlled by we the people to protect us from monopolies controlled by C-level sociopaths. How is that so hard to understand?
Then again, on second thought, maybe you're right. "We the people" gave us fucking Trump and a Republican house and senate. CLEARLY "we the people" can't be trusted with that level of power.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @05:06PM
Thanks for the laugh. The US government controlled by "we the people". Hee hee! What a riot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @10:38PM
If net neutrality were the only issue in the election, I would've voted for Hillary Clinton.
Trouble is, on 100% of the other issues with disagreement, she was horrible. Unlike her and her voters, I don't hate America. I don't feel guilty for being part of the greatest civilization ever, and I have no desire to see that civilization brought down.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JNCF on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:47PM (1 child)
"'Free market' cunts" is an awfully large umbrella; at least in this context, I definitely fall under it (see my OpenLibernet post above). Here I am on SN, over two years ago, arguing that municipal governments should be given the means to defend their own internet infrastructures. [soylentnews.org] Now you've seen it.
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:52PM
Err, over three years ago. Time is weird.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:50PM (10 children)
You haven't paid any attention whatsoever to what I've said on Capitalism and how Monopolies have no place in them then. You should try opening your eyes and reading once in a while.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @05:37PM (9 children)
I doubt that is the case, people hear you and try and point out your naivety but you refuse to accept that your model is broken. The free market inevitably leads to behemoth corporations since putting everything under one umbrella enables ever higher profit margins. The behemoths influence legislation, so round and round we go.
I think the free market is a marvelous idea! But there is no place for human greed or unethical practices. Those things HAVE to go.
See how stupid my position is? Yours is only slightly better, but comparing shit to worse shit isn't a validation.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @06:34PM (8 children)
"My model" has created essentially every prosperous nation the world has ever seen. I'll stand by that record any day.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @07:08PM (7 children)
I'll stand right beside you with the sign saying "This man suffers from clinical psychosis." I wouldn't trust you beyond managing a 7/11, and even then I'd be worried you'd shoot a customer carrying a non-weapon in their jacket.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @07:23PM (6 children)
S'what they get for walking around a chicken leg under their arm. Nice complete dodge of the issue, by the way.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @08:30PM (5 children)
The issue was capitalism and monopolies, and it was addressed by pointing out that capitalism leads to monopolies unless you have massive government regulation (non free market).
You responded with a red herring
I responded with a similar level of critical analysis regarding your mental condition.
You respond with:
Clearly you are a borderline psychotic who should have his firearm license replaced with a nice padded cell.
You are correct, I did not address your stupid point because it was stupid. You want to look at only the positives and ignore the negatives, you should change your name to The MIghty Ostrich. You need some learnin' boy, most of the US domination has been through shady tactics of empire building and has little to do with capitalism vs. communism.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @08:57PM (4 children)
You refuse to address the issue because you are wrong and you know it. Capitalism has created the vast majority of the world's wealth. Socialism and Communism have destroyed more wealth than they have created.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @10:48PM (3 children)
Why bother arguing with an ideologue? Common sense doesn't matter, just your crappy simplistic viewpoint of the world. China would beg to differ, it took them a while to catch up but they're about to leave the US and other Western countries in the dust. You'll be that old semi-senile guy yelling "capitalism!" while all the young folks go about building a better world. Most likely it will involve capitalism, because as I always say the world needs a mix. Only morons such as yourself think capitalism is the end-all-be-all. I blame propaganda, but I also adhere to certain amounts of personal responsibility and lay the blame upon you as well for being too lazy to get a real education.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @12:11AM (2 children)
Why did you bother typing out a full paragraph to say "nuh uh!"?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @04:51PM (1 child)
Cause going through the trouble of getting sources about socialized healthcare is a waste of time, your brain twists around, moves the goal posts, and does back flips coming up with reasons that reality is wrong. Posting a quick paragraph about your stupidity is easy, spending time on documenting exactly WHY is time consuming and therefore not something I'll do for an argument with an ostrich.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @05:05PM
I'm not TMB. I'm just an AC asking you why you think playground namecalling is anything more than your own mental masterbation.
Interesting to note that you think backing up your own viewpoints is too time consuming.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:28PM (31 children)
Yeah, because that'll work great! Hell, the 'free market' can't even do health care worth a crap. The U.S.'s free market is more expensive and no better to less effective than pretty much any other industrialized country on the planet. Did I mention your 'free market' is MORE expensive. LOL. And that's in a market that doesn't have a physical restriction of having to have infrastructure running to every building. You need to stop fantasizing about your imaginary 'free market', get off your unicorn, put the meth down, and join the rest of us in the real world..
(Score: 2, Disagree) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:53PM (30 children)
The free market gave the US the most advanced healthcare industry on the planet despite massive government interference. Care to try again?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:14PM (25 children)
What exactly do we have, other than high costs, that other countries don't?
Other countries have lower rates of infant mortality. Other countries have longer life expectancy. Other countries have lower rates of obesity. The only thing we're "most advanced" at with health care is how much we spend on it.
Try being one of the tens of millions of Americans without health insurance and then tell us all how advanced our health care system is.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:18PM (24 children)
Sell that garbage to someone that doesn't know that other countries rely on the advances in healthcare that the American market has created. Consider for a moment every healthcare advancement that's come out of the US and then picture the world without any of them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @05:13PM (8 children)
Care to separate those advances which were developed at public universities or using research grants from NIH or other government agencies vs. those made by for-profit health institutions using their own moneys?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @06:19PM (7 children)
Let's do it the easy way instead. You point out a significant medical advancement from a nation that at the time had socialized medicine and I'll point out two from just the US.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @08:34PM (5 children)
ongoing socialized medicine [nhsggc.org.uk]
Nice goal post moving, you're an intellectual GIANT TMB, GIIIANNNT /s
Guess you just can't face the facts that so much of the US advances are funded by tax payers, your poor model of perfection is so iiiiignoraaant. You're an ignorant FOOL TMB, ignorant as FUCK. If you'd at least stop posting that shit online like its the second coming of christ I wouldn't need to point out your deficiencies.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @08:59PM (4 children)
Oh, you mean they're funded by capitalists who've had their money stolen? Yeah, no shit. There wouldn't be anything to steal if it weren't for capitalism.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @10:50PM (3 children)
You're really swinging for the fences here. I guess you really are the taxation is theft guy, TMB the bloody idiot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @12:15AM (2 children)
When you have no valid argument, ad hominem, amirite?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @04:54PM (1 child)
That is the way TMB operates, I just have no desire to point out the problems with the base assertion that capitalism is the only reason humanity has advanced. It is arrogant and naive, and no amount of arguing will change the mind of the likes of him.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @05:02PM
And yet for all your enlightenment, the best you could come up with is a one-line post to call TMB names?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @11:19PM
You're the one who made the assertion. It's your responsibility to provide evidence for your claim.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @05:40PM (14 children)
hahahahaha, yeah the US is the sole inventor of all modern technology. Get off your high horse you nit.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @06:17PM (13 children)
If you'd bother to check your history books, we damned near have been in healthcare for the past hundred years or so. This attitude of superiority comes from being genuinely superior.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @07:13PM (12 children)
Yes, the US was the world leader for a long time after WWII due to our economic maneuvering. That doesn't make us inherently better, we were just lucky to be positioned so well after the war. But hey, you never let extenuating circumstances stop you from making stupid statements so please, do continue with your arrogant stupidity trying to sell US healthcare as a "better system".
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @07:26PM (11 children)
Yes, yes it very much does make us better when the metric is what system has produced the most medical advances in the world. Do please tell us how socialism or communism is better even though it has failed to produce anything worthwhile every single time it has been tried at a national level.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @08:21PM (10 children)
Because all the data on socialized healthcare shows it is better for the citizens and private healthcare options are still able to exist, but they must compete on a level playing field instead of their monopolistic insurance influenced field. Suck a dick you red herring piece of crap.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 20 2017, @09:02PM (9 children)
No, it most certainly does not. All the data shows that you get shitty care and insane waits for any kind of treatment. Even if you're willing to pay more. Why the hell do you think so many people come to the US for treatment?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @09:42PM (8 children)
Not GP, but to answer your question, look at the numbers, they don't. Comparatively, very few people come to the US for treatment. Although I do agree that the numbers are indicative of the quality of the US's health care system (spoiler: it sucks)
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @10:53PM (7 children)
He doesn't care about facts, he only cares about propaganda. Dude is fucking dumb. All this same shit has been trotted out before, but he always returns to the same crap arguments that ignore reality. My guess is he just can't BELIEVE the US empire is falling so he's falling back on the comfortable and familiar dreams.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @12:09AM (6 children)
So, all you got is ad hominem...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @04:26AM (5 children)
It's not ad hominem to say someone doesn't care about the facts, and are kind of dumb, when they just made an easily checked and objectively false statement. To declare the US health care system is the best on the planet is patently false and not backed up by data. To rave about 'why do so many people come to the US for health care' when less then half the number of people go to the US as go to Iran is absurd. That the poster doesn't care about facts is not ad hominem, it's just a fact.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @04:28PM (4 children)
The statement "Dude is fucking dumb" is ad hominem, and it is pathetically deceitful of you to try to claim otherwise. If the false statement is so easily checked and objectively demonstrated to be false, why not post THAT instead of a post that a third-grader would be ashamed of?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @05:37PM (3 children)
The original 'Dude is fucking dumb', wasn't me. But the only thing improper about the statement is the term 'fucking" and while it distracts from the point and is not helpful, it's not really ad-hominem.
dumb
adj 1: slow to learn or understand; lacking intellectual acuity;
"so dense he never understands anything I say to him";
"never met anyone quite so dim"; "although dull at
classical learning, at mathematics he was uncommonly
quick"- Thackeray; "dumb officials make some really
dumb decisions"; "he was either normally stupid or
being deliberately obtuse"; "worked with the slow
students" [syn: {dense}, {dim}, {dull}, {obtuse}, {slow}]
I think that in this case, I'd give the benefit of the doubt and go with 'being deliberately obtuse' as the most accurate use of the term dumb. But i think 'dumb' is a perfectly valid word choice for someone who deliberately and repeatedly spouts obvious untruths. It's accurate, not ad-hominem.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @07:25PM (2 children)
True or not, attacking the person rather than the argument is ad hominem, and is an invalid debate tactic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @10:42PM (1 child)
In retrospect, I have to agree. Calling the poster dumb was ad hominem, calling the action dumb would not have been.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 22 2017, @12:22AM
Whoa, wait, what? Listen, pal, that's not how it works around here. Once you've made a claim, you stick to it no matter what.
Seriously, though, I look forward to throwing more ideas around with you, AC, to see what bits break off whose ideas first. =)
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:26PM
I think the problem is coverage, not quality.
(I won't even get into who is eligble for said coverage and how to fund it)
I have to wonder if some of our incredibly expensive cures would be less expensive of the economies of scale were to kick in -- or if only people like the pharma bro guy are responsible for many of the costs of what could be cheap, but isn't.
Anyway, a taxpayer handout for everyone to get covered, plus jerks like him and his business plans to raise prices because he can -- clearly will make any solution cost more than it has to, even if we had remained with what we had before the ACA. It's insurance that pays through the nose most of the time, and our system makes our premiums go up in part due to that kind of greed.
But there's no question the US has among the most advanced medical care systems for diagnosis and treatments that one could hope for. In intractable problem is that many people hope to be a part of it and don't have the resources to do so.
Preventative maintenance coverage could do a lot to keep costs down...while still offending nearly everyone as not being enough in either direction.
Regardless, I'd pay a few more bucks in taxes* as part of some massive government initiative to try to prevent the spread of preventable illnesses and raise the standard of living, but that opinion is not shared by everyone.
*I don't know what that amount actually is, but my opinion of what acceptable costs would be based on what actually is proposed and who is actually covered...the sky is not the limit
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:39PM
If you weren't a poor person you could have traveled to other countries to see their healthcare systems for yourself.
Maybe there is some million dollar an hour dick extension surgeon somewhere in the USA but the average joe schmoe might as well go to fucking china.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @05:00PM (1 child)
You almost owe me a new keyboard, good times. Well let's see, the U.S. is sooo advanced we must have the longest life spans... Japan, Switzerland, heck can't even see the U.S. on that list. Well it must be child mortality?... Luxemburg, Iceland... nope the U.S. is far, far down the list.
Hmm, well the US must be so obviously better than everyone else that people must come to the U.S. in droves to get a piece of the fantastic level of health care available here. How many Health tourist does the U.S. get? Let's go with the high end, the U.S. gets like 85K health tourist! It MUST be the best, go USA, go USA!... But wait, Singapore gets 400K+ people a year, that just must be an outlier, ohhh, Thailand gets 400K+ too, and Malayasia 340K+. Okay who compares to the US, wait Iran gets 200K+, India 150K+, fuck, the US must really suck.
Well how does the US compare in health ranks by the WHO? Is it in the top 10?... nope. Top 20 for fucksake?... nope.
Your beliefs seem to be based on delusions of nationalism. Brother, I'd suggest you get some mental health care, but considering the health care system your in, well, your screwed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 21 2017, @01:11AM
But President Reagan got rid of it back in the 80s :)
(Score: 5, Informative) by crafoo on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:07PM
The only one running to daddy here are the large ISP corporations. They are paying local and federal representatives and policy makers to exclude competition and erect artificial barriers to new businesses entering the market. In an effort to restore competition and an open market, the populace has decided it is in our best interests to enact "common carrier" rules. In exchange for monopolistic position of maintaining and providing the internet infrastructure, these same companies may not interfere, filter, or in any way modify information using this infrastructure. Much the same way 3rd party contractors may not erect toll booths on interstate highways.
It's our infrastructure. We make the rules. Don't like it, GET OUT.