In a free-market economy, "providing investment" is not the government's role - and if these new rules are too broadly construed, they could dry up tens of billions in annual private investment in broadband infrastructure.
What's more, they could needlessly restrict Internet service providers' ability to manage the traffic on their networks. As anyone who watches their TV ads knows, broadband providers have to offer their customers services valuable enough to justify the subscription fees that pay for their multibillion-dollar upgrades.
Advocates of network-neutrality regulations are generally unconcerned that they will result in a collapse of private investment in Internet infrastructure, because they regard private investment - perhaps even the private economy as a whole - as an unnecessary impediment to their vision of government.
Read Phil Kerpen’s piece in the Washington Times: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/11/big-government-obama/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment