<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Study: FCC To Kill 500,000 Jobs With Net Neutrality</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.libertariannews.org/2010/06/18/study-fcc-to-kill-500000-jobs-with-net-neutrality/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.libertariannews.org/2010/06/18/study-fcc-to-kill-500000-jobs-with-net-neutrality/</link>
	<description>Hate The State</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 13:17:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy</title>
		<link>http://www.libertariannews.org/2010/06/18/study-fcc-to-kill-500000-jobs-with-net-neutrality/#comment-4757</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:54:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fascistsoup.com/?p=4022#comment-4757</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#039;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#039;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#039;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.

That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &quot;neutrality&quot; and the fascist corporations on the side of &quot;freedom&quot; are both trying to use the government to get their way.

What I don&#039;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#039;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#039;em all and let God sort it out.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#8217;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#8217;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#8217;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.</p>
<p>That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &#8220;neutrality&#8221; and the fascist corporations on the side of &#8220;freedom&#8221; are both trying to use the government to get their way.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#8217;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#8216;em all and let God sort it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy</title>
		<link>http://www.libertariannews.org/2010/06/18/study-fcc-to-kill-500000-jobs-with-net-neutrality/#comment-4758</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:54:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fascistsoup.com/?p=4022#comment-4758</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#039;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#039;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#039;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.

That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &quot;neutrality&quot; and the fascist corporations on the side of &quot;freedom&quot; are both trying to use the government to get their way.

What I don&#039;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#039;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#039;em all and let God sort it out.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#8217;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#8217;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#8217;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.</p>
<p>That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &#8220;neutrality&#8221; and the fascist corporations on the side of &#8220;freedom&#8221; are both trying to use the government to get their way.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#8217;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#8216;em all and let God sort it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy</title>
		<link>http://www.libertariannews.org/2010/06/18/study-fcc-to-kill-500000-jobs-with-net-neutrality/#comment-4759</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:54:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fascistsoup.com/?p=4022#comment-4759</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#039;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#039;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#039;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.

That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &quot;neutrality&quot; and the fascist corporations on the side of &quot;freedom&quot; are both trying to use the government to get their way.

What I don&#039;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#039;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#039;em all and let God sort it out.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#8217;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#8217;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#8217;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.</p>
<p>That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &#8220;neutrality&#8221; and the fascist corporations on the side of &#8220;freedom&#8221; are both trying to use the government to get their way.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#8217;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#8216;em all and let God sort it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy</title>
		<link>http://www.libertariannews.org/2010/06/18/study-fcc-to-kill-500000-jobs-with-net-neutrality/#comment-4760</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:54:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fascistsoup.com/?p=4022#comment-4760</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#039;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#039;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#039;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.

That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &quot;neutrality&quot; and the fascist corporations on the side of &quot;freedom&quot; are both trying to use the government to get their way.

What I don&#039;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#039;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#039;em all and let God sort it out.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#8217;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#8217;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#8217;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.</p>
<p>That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &#8220;neutrality&#8221; and the fascist corporations on the side of &#8220;freedom&#8221; are both trying to use the government to get their way.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#8217;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#8216;em all and let God sort it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy</title>
		<link>http://www.libertariannews.org/2010/06/18/study-fcc-to-kill-500000-jobs-with-net-neutrality/#comment-4761</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:54:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fascistsoup.com/?p=4022#comment-4761</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#039;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#039;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#039;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.

That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &quot;neutrality&quot; and the fascist corporations on the side of &quot;freedom&quot; are both trying to use the government to get their way.

What I don&#039;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#039;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#039;em all and let God sort it out.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#8217;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#8217;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#8217;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.</p>
<p>That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &#8220;neutrality&#8221; and the fascist corporations on the side of &#8220;freedom&#8221; are both trying to use the government to get their way.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#8217;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#8216;em all and let God sort it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy</title>
		<link>http://www.libertariannews.org/2010/06/18/study-fcc-to-kill-500000-jobs-with-net-neutrality/#comment-4762</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:54:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fascistsoup.com/?p=4022#comment-4762</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#039;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#039;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#039;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.

That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &quot;neutrality&quot; and the fascist corporations on the side of &quot;freedom&quot; are both trying to use the government to get their way.

What I don&#039;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#039;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#039;em all and let God sort it out.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#8217;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#8217;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#8217;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.</p>
<p>That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &#8220;neutrality&#8221; and the fascist corporations on the side of &#8220;freedom&#8221; are both trying to use the government to get their way.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#8217;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#8216;em all and let God sort it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy</title>
		<link>http://www.libertariannews.org/2010/06/18/study-fcc-to-kill-500000-jobs-with-net-neutrality/#comment-4763</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:54:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fascistsoup.com/?p=4022#comment-4763</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#039;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#039;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#039;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.

That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &quot;neutrality&quot; and the fascist corporations on the side of &quot;freedom&quot; are both trying to use the government to get their way.

What I don&#039;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#039;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#039;em all and let God sort it out.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would hesitate to say that service providers are any more dedicated to the free market than the net neutrality nuts (take Moby or the editors at Wired, for example). However, despite the current stranglehold providers have on telecommunications networks thanks to federal regulation, I do not think that MORE regulation will solve anything. It&#8217;s akin to saying the lake doesn&#8217;t have enough water because of a dam upstream, so let&#8217;s build another one downstream. That will solve everything.</p>
<p>That may be the point, though. No net, no problem. I guess my point is that both sides of the argument appear to be wrong in this case. Both the state worshiping nuts on the side of &#8220;neutrality&#8221; and the fascist corporations on the side of &#8220;freedom&#8221; are both trying to use the government to get their way.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t get is why any article I have come across about this issue hasn&#8217;t mentioned that the problem is current regulation. There is no freedom and there is no free market. I say deregulate the market completely and let the market do what it does best, natural selection. In other words, kill &#8216;em all and let God sort it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
