SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/29/15100620/congress-fcc-isp-web-browsing-privacy-fire-sale
Republicans in Congress just voted to reverse a landmark FCC privacy rule that opens the door for ISPs to sell customer data. Lawmakers provided no credible reason for this being in the interest of Americans, except for vague platitudes about "consumer choice" and "free markets," as if consumers at the mercy of their local internet monopoly are craving to have their web history quietly sold to marketers and any other third party willing to pay.
The only people who seem to want this are the people who are going to make lots of money from it. (Hint: they work for companies like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T.) Incidentally, these people and their companies routinely give lots of money to members of Congress.
So here [below in the article] is a list of the lawmakers who voted to betray you, and how much money they received from the telecom industry in their most recent election cycle.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Monday November 27 2017, @05:13AM (8 children)
I'd find the senior senator from my state on the list of "yes" votes, given that he's been a corporate shill ever since he beat the previous (R) corporate shill that he replaced.
But it wasn't there. Hmm...is it just because he has a 'D' after his name?
Well, I guess I hate him a little less now.
Hey all you Rs and fellow travelers, what say you about those you put in office now?
I know, I know. The morons^W libertarians are all for it. Herp, free markets. Derp, gub'mint bad! Bad gub'mint! Except what we're seeing isn't libertarianism. What we're seeing is Corporations+captured government/regulators [harvard.edu]=Oligarchic [wikipedia.org] Plutocracy [wikipedia.org].
That's not real libertarianism. That's not even real republicanism (small 'r'), although it does seem to be the sport of our plutocratic overlords. I, for one, do *not* welcome them.
Oh, and guess what? L'Orange (not to be confused with L'Grande Orange [wikipedia.org]) is one of those plutocrats. He's not your buddy and he doesn't give a rat's ass about the health and welfare of the U.S. or its citizens, unless their name is Donald J. Trump.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 27 2017, @05:54AM (1 child)
Shhh! Do not wake the LibertariaSheeple! Once the realize how badly they have be used, and see who's dick is up their butt, well, that is more than any human should have to bear. I say, let them sleep, with dreams of a libertarian paradise like Somalia, or Vermont. Some where where your neighbor can blind-side tackle you because you mowed going the wrong way, and spewed grass clippings on another free and sovereign individual's lawn. If only it had been Somalia. Lawn disputes are very quickly settled there, as most mowers are not hardened against RPGs. Poor Libertardtarians.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 27 2017, @08:08PM
You're just jealous because the Invisible Hand in Libertardtaria has provided low-cost RPG-resistant mowers!
The Invisible Hand is still working on the problem of tactical nuke-resistant mowers.
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Monday November 27 2017, @06:16AM (2 children)
If you're going to label this corporate purchasing of policy something, why would you pick 'free market' over oligarchy? (or I guess capitalist with significant oligarch corruption)
(Score: 3, Touché) by NotSanguine on Monday November 27 2017, @07:06AM
You are absolutely right. That's what I should have said. What would I do without you?
Perhaps I could even have called it "Oligarchic Plutocracy." Yes. I'm so ashamed that I didn't do it that way.
Oh, wait, that's *exactly what I said [soylentnews.org]:
I guess my question to you is whether you just wanted to poke me with a stick or if you missed that part? I suspect it's the former since the only mention of "free markets" was in the same paragraph to which you were responding. Or am I missing something important?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by dry on Tuesday November 28 2017, @04:46AM
It is the free market, the free market in buying government. That's the great thing about capitalism, if you have the capital, you can buy laws to make sure you get more capital as long as you have enough capital to win in the free market of congress critters.
The golden rule, he who has the gold, makes the rules.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Monday November 27 2017, @07:30AM (2 children)
In fact, there are no libertarians in Congress, and only two that come close. Neither Senator Rand Paul or Representative Justin Amash voted for this. There is nothing remotely libertarian about it, and in fact, it appears you're the only one that has hallucinated any connection to libertarianism here.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 27 2017, @08:02AM (1 child)
And who do these alleged "libertarian" members of Congress caucus with? Hmmm? Yep, as asserted by the ancient wisdom, libertarians are just Republicans who smoke pot. And are kinky.
(Score: 4, Touché) by c0lo on Monday November 27 2017, @08:16AM
Kinky good. Sleazy bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0