RobertNashville

Apparently, they've solved all other crime in Maryland.

Maybe you should consider moving to places that have more choices?  Should everyone in the country be saddled with federal regulations just so some people can be happy?  Should those people who don't need or want the level of service you seem to think should be mandatory be forced to subsidize your use?   If you truly want more choices then I can assure you that federal regulations will NOT provide them.   With that said, I'm done with this..you are NEVER going to change my mind about this...if you believe I"m wrong hen you believe I'm wrong; I can live with that!

That’s kind of how these discussions work…one person posts something and everyone else judges what he/she said and what they think about what was said and whether they agree or not and then post their comments about it. Wow! I can instantly think of several members here who’s heads will explode if/when they read that statement! LOL How you could have ever read any of my posts and come up with that statement is a wondrous thing. I don’t, never have and never said I hate government…I do hate it when government does things it has no right to be doing. In the case of public schools the government is responsible for the failure because they are government run and predominantly government controlled institutions. Whenever possible I use and often even cite credible sources such as, on this subject, the department of education and studies done by universities and research organizations…the fact that this data is available on the internet makes it no less accurate or substantial or credible that if I went to the library and looked up the printed version of the information. Information which, by the way, beats ANY anecdotal information anyone can site about their personal experience with “kids coming out of school”. Personal experience with working “with some pretty sharp young people” who weren’t home schooled is meaningless compared to empirical studies…if you don’t understand that then there is little more anyone can say that will make any difference to you. And just why does poor or in some cases, selfish decisions by some parents obligate the rest of the country to educate their offspring? Do you believe in personal responsibility or do you believe in utilitarianism? From your comments I’m “judging” that it’s the latter. I refer you to what I said above about empirical studies vs. personal experience. Or might I suggest that instead of simply disparaging those “internet links” you provide some competent facts and evidence to support your claim…seems to me that would be the “common sense” thing to do! LOL So NOW it’s the job of the parents…would those be the same parents that just moments ago you said were incapable of educating their children? LOL There would be no need to “fix” these problems if the country realized that public education is both a failure AND unnecessary. As I’ve said numerous times, if there is going to be “public schools” they should exist only when the parents who want their children in those schools come together, fund them and control them..not force everyone to pay for them while bureaucrats who are hundreds or thousands of miles away dictate how they are to be run and what they can teach. No one is ever doomed to ignorance unless they chose to be so…one never has to darken the door of a school to become profoundly knowledgeable and educated about the world around him. Sadly, this mindset that we must have public schools is likely at least partially to blame for just how dumb the people of America have become. It’s obvious that you don’t read my posts correctly (or perhaps not at all) as I’ve previously answered your questions about where my experience comes from.

No; it isn't only your way of thinking...it really isn't. More than that it's the RIGHT way of thinking.

Thanks for posting this...I really liked watching Gilligan's Island. Campy and stupid but still really great, fun entertainment (I especially liked the "Wrong Way Feldmen" episodes.

Actually; with most insurance companies you are paying for coverage, sometimes in advance, sometimes not but I would suggest that if you have an accident one day after the last day you paid for the insurance you would find yourself without coverage.   Anyway, no company should be required to provide any service that hasn't been paid for...perhaps utilities are more callous than some other companies but I don't think you can really fault a utility for cutting off a service that hasn't been paid for. Also, maybe it's different in your are but in mine, most of my utilities have a week or two after a payment is "late" before hey cut off service...the water company even calls me if I haven't made my payment on time and tells me how may days I have to pay before the service is disconnected.

Simply not true...you have other choices and to continue your Lambo/Kia example what some here want is to drive their Lambo whil Kia owners subsidize them for it.

He isn't interested in evidence; probably because the evidence of the last 40 years proves that children who are home schooled far exceed their public school counterparts both academically and socially. Our public schools are so bad that for those who try college usually have to have remedial classes to teach them what they needed to learn in high school so that they have a chance of actually completing college successfully.   Based on his comments it seems he also believes that we must have public schools because of all the parents (actually just sperm and egg donors) who can't raise their children; much less educate them...well...last time I looked, the incompetence of these "parents" does not obligate the rest of us to educate their offspring and shouldn't give the state the right to confiscate our money to pay for it.   Moreover, for the more than $12 THOUSAND we pay per student per year to house them we ought to be getting Einsteins and Mozarts out of public schools on a very regular basis rather than "would you like fries with that" workers (who couldn't even do that job without pictures on the cash registers).

I don't have to agree because if I agreed they were a monopoly I'd be wrong.  Cable internet providers do not have a monopoly on internet services; they never have. I know what a true monopoly is and ISPs are not monopolies. There are plenty of people who think they are or want to be be so that they can be regulated but they are not monopolies. Calling them monopolies and regulating them is not the answer to what people say they want...regulation will led to less competition, not more...less bandwidth, not more...higher prices, not lower.   I have no idea what you mean with your comment."Hell, they operate their business the same way. If they don't pay, cut them off."???  What business doesn't cut off a customer who doesn't pay???  :shrug: As to polls, there isn't a poll in sight where I live!

Why?  Because a private enterprise has determined that it's a business model that is best for them...that's what free enterprise is about.   If it doesn't work for them then they'll change or suffer the results of not changing.

I must have missed something but didn't you say you hate Krogerd but that you shop there all the time? If you hate them wouldn't it make more sense not to shop there?

Who is “they” exactly and what property and when? It’s a pointless question without specifics. Rights of way are negotiated by those who want then with the property owners at the time it is wanted.   More to the point, there is this thing called the Constitution, especially the takings clause, that specifically allows government to take and/or use property…if you don’t like it that government can do that then what you need to do is stop arguing with me about it and go get the Constitution changed.   Until you do that what you like or don’t like about the process is immaterial.     Neither do I…so what…nothing we have talked about here has been impacted at all by that decision.     The state isn’t taking away any rights at all. It’s actually quite simple…it’s called the Constitution (see above). Parking lot laws do not violate the Constitution (as has been determined by the courts multiple times). Courts recognize that it is better for society as a whole that we have responsible, armed citizens…effectively disarming them with “no firearm” policies in parking lots is contrary to the public good and States determining that parking lot owners cannot forbid firearms in their parking lots so long as those arms are kept in the citizen’s vehicle has zero negative impact on parking lot owners. It’s odd how you appear to be worried about parking lot laws that have no negative impact (financial or operational) on a company that owns the parking lot yet you seem to want the government to regulate the business operations of internet service providers which has a direct and negative impact on those companies.   Government regulation of broadband providers is a sure way to kill competition, reduce profits and most importantly, strangle the sources of the tremendous capital investment required to improve the country’s broadband capabilities. If people want faster broadband and more competition the answer is to not saddle providers with regulations that dictate their business structure.

Pretty easy to vote for something when the vote has absolutely no meaning.   When they COULD have done something to stop Obamacare (defund the mechanism that implements it) the vast majority of Republicans in the house and senate CAVED and many even attacked the few Republicans who were actually attempting to do something that actually made a difference.   Now, those same Republican leaders are declaring war on ME and every other true conservative who are fed up with Republican elitists bull ####. As far as I'm concerned, they and the whole damn party can go to hell...I'd rather vote for a liberal Democrat at this point than these worthless establishment Republicans.

Maybe it's different here in Tennessee but where I grew up and the states I've lived in other than TN, electric companies, water companies and natural gas companies, etc.paid for their access to land.  Property owners may not have had the legal authority to stop them but they were compensated. I know this well because for my first 11 years after leaving the Navy I worked as a senior financial analyst for the (then) largest natural gas utility company in the country; operating in seven states.   In cities, most utility lines, except those running to the house (which are legally the homeowners' property) are part of the street/city right of way; which is something you agree to when you chose to live there and buy the property.   Our Constitution specifically allows the government to take property for the overall good of society so long as proper compensation is made. I'm not suggesting this should be done recklessly but it's a necessary function of a complicated society. Moreover, I don't see this as any sort of "special privilege" but a function of the government's powers that the founders specifically provided.

Was there something unclear about the word "never"?  ;)

I don't think you really understand how utilities work.

Public utilities were necessary due to the incredibly high capital investment required to make those commodities available and the power of govt was necessary to make rights of ways. Without that the companies that provide the services would either not exist at all or only exist in densely populated areas where the economies of scale make a profit realistic. I fully subscribe to the axiom that the government should ONLY do what the private can not, will not or should not do - in the case of services such as gas, electricity, water/sewer it was a fully appropriate use of government.

Look...you are NEVER going to change my mind on this.  This issue is about one thing; free-market capitalism vs. government control. You either believe that businesses should be free to set their own business plans and succeed or fail on those plans OR you believe that government bureaucrats should control it.

Me too...I always have at least a pistol within arm's reach and/or on me at home and I don't ever go to the door without a sidearm with me.  In fact, I rarely go to the door at all, especially at night, unless it's someone I'm expecting and/or one of my neighbors that I recognize...quite sad when I think about how it was when I was growing up and we rarely locked our doors at all.   Glad nothing happened at Kroger...I used to shop that one all the time when I lived on that said of the "Boro...these days it's the one on Church Street out near Barfield (or what used to be called Barfield!).

Television is not and has never been a regulated utility.   Electricity, natural gas, water/sewer...THESE are utilities and in a city are fairly necessary to life for a number of reasons.   Internet Access is NOT necessary to life..is not a utility and never should be. Its a service that no one "must" have and that no company should ever be required to even offer or be told how to offer.   I'm still stunned at how quickly of what one would tend to believe is a collection of conservative/libertarian, small-government, Constitutionally minded, capitalists/free-market thinkers are so damn quick to go begging the federal government to regulate something because it might inconvenience them.   What some proponents of "net neutrality" really seem to want is for those who don't use significant amounts of bandwidth/specific services to subsidize the bandwidth/services of others...the most significant difference between what those proponents of "net neutrality" want and what the people who wanted Obamacare wanted is the name of the product.

I can imagine all sorts of things but the AR really didn't come into it.

So..........not only are you an old fart but a perverted one at that! LOL

That's just profoundly sad.  Thank God the child wasn't killed as well.

Forcibly removed??? Well, your local school system may not be sending a SWAT team around every morning to collect your children at gunpoint but if you don't send then "voluntarily" (sort of like our "voluntarily federal income tax) I believe criminal charges will soon follow and in fact, you children at that point may well be "forcibly removed" from the home and maybe for good. That sound's pretty "forcible" to me :shrug: and all because the almighty federal government knows what your children need to learn better than YOU do. And what do we get for all the effort and thousands (total expenditures for public elementary and secondary schools in the United States amounted to $638 billion in 2009-10, or about $12,743 per public school student.*) of dollars per student spent every year??? We get High School "graduates" that know nothing of geography, history, literature, art, music, how our government is actually supposed to work, how to do basic math (if they don't have a smart phone handy with a calculator app). We get kids who don't know how to think...who likely have never had an original thought in their head or if they did, had it drummed out of them by a corrupt system that teaches only compliance, political correctness and tolerance (unless of course you happen to be a Christian and/or Caucasian - you can screw with those kids all you want; no worries). You get kids who will likely never pick up a book for the rest of their lives and just read it for the shear enjoyment of it or to actually learn something. You get good little comrades rather than citizens. The children are our future and our future is VERY BLEAK. * source: U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences National Center for Education Statistics

And if the FCC starts regulating ISPs as public utilities/common carriers they just might do so or ban anything else they find objectionable (like...oh...firearm related forums) and there would be NOTHING to stop them. After all, it would be to protect the children since we all know that parents don't monitor what their kids do online.