Obama Admin wants to raise your cell phone bill

[falconrap]

Rights have historically been those things given to us by our Creator and not subject to the whims of legal documentation. Your right to speak freely, report to others what you see, to arm and defend yourself, to be secure in your person, et al. These are rights. High speed internet is not a right. A right must be something that affects you voluntarily. It can't be something where you force others into some level of servitude, whether it be monetary or through physical acts. Making high speed internet a "right" would mean forcing others to provide a service to you whether they choose to or not. It would also mean forcing others to pay for the availability of that service whether they choose to or not. When you are forcing others to provide something to for others, that doesn't fall under the category of "rights," it's under the purview of tyranny.

Why are we, and European countries, in so much debt? By creating "rights" that don't exist and spending money on things that Governments don't need to be doing. Simple as that.

 

[christenmartin]

Rights have historically been those things given to us by our Creator and not subject to the whims of legal documentation. Your right to speak freely, report to others what you see, to arm and defend yourself, to be secure in your person, et al. These are rights. High speed internet is not a right. A right must be something that affects you voluntarily. It can't be something where you force others into some level of servitude, whether it be monetary or through physical acts. Making high speed internet a "right" would mean forcing others to provide a service to you whether they choose to or not. It would also mean forcing others to pay for the availability of that service whether they choose to or not. When you are forcing others to provide something to for others, that doesn't fall under the category of "rights," it's under the purview of tyranny.

Why are we, and European countries, in so much debt? By creating "rights" that don't exist and spending money on things that Governments don't need to be doing. Simple as that.

Exactly! Well put. Politician always represent the masses that can't speak for them selves and the always want free handouts that everybody with a job needs to chip in for. Problem there is NO RESPONSIBILITY IN GOVERNMENT. They tax 100 dollars and spend 200 and no one knows where the money goes just that we need more.

 

[N_LaRUE]

The libertarians and the right are out in force on this thread I see. Oh well. I'll just let this one go I'm not going to argue politics in an off topic area of a mobile phone OS forum.

 

[ajst222]

The libertarians and the right are out in force on this thread I see. Oh well. I'll just let this one go I'm not going to argue politics in an off topic area of a mobile phone OS forum.

Or maybe just people with common sense? Because that's all it takes. I am a Libertarian myself but I can't say for certain that everyone else is.

 

[spaulagain]

Rights have historically been those things given to us by our Creator and not subject to the whims of legal documentation. Your right to speak freely, report to others what you see, to arm and defend yourself, to be secure in your person, et al. These are rights. High speed internet is not a right. A right must be something that affects you voluntarily. It can't be something where you force others into some level of servitude, whether it be monetary or through physical acts. Making high speed internet a "right" would mean forcing others to provide a service to you whether they choose to or not. It would also mean forcing others to pay for the availability of that service whether they choose to or not. When you are forcing others to provide something to for others, that doesn't fall under the category of "rights," it's under the purview of tyranny.

Why are we, and European countries, in so much debt? By creating "rights" that don't exist and spending money on things that Governments don't need to be doing. Simple as that.

Exactly!

These countries that create "rights" based on services are the ones running themselves into the ground. The minute you guarantee a service (which requires people and money) as a right, you are obligated to provide it indefinitely.

I don't care what political party you are in, guaranteeing internet service as a right is the dumbest thing ever.

 

[christenmartin]

Or maybe just people with common sense? Because that's all it takes. I am a Libertarian myself but I can't say for certain that everyone else is.

careful. Common sense has no place in a discussion regarding taxes.

 

[spaulagain]

Well you may have that a bit wrong, either that or I'm reading this wrong.

In Finland, for example, they have made high speed broadband a 'right' meaning that everyone in the country should be able to access high speed internet in the country. Yes you are correct that the person has to 'want' the service in the first place and will still pay for it, but you will have the right of a certain speed.

BBC News - Finland makes broadband a 'legal right'

Just because Finland's government is stupid enough to guarantee this service as some "right" doesn't make the act of doing so valid or sustainable.

The right of a certain speed? So if a storm comes through and wipes out the service in an area, those citizens can accuse the government of violating their right?

Seriously, this is just stupid.

 

[christenmartin]

Exactly!

These countries that create "rights" based on services are the ones running themselves into the ground. The minute you guarantee a service (which requires people and money) as a right, you are obligated to provide it indefinitely.

I don't care what political party you are in, guaranteeing internet service as a right is the dumbest thing ever.

Ya it's just popularism. Vote for me and get free internet! But its not free you have to steal money from others and then it costs 10$ for this piece of equipment, through government everybody wants the cut so the piece of equipment now cost 100 dollars. Great if you are in government. This happens daily and no one is ever held accountable. In the US if gas goes up 5 cents congress is holding hearing on oil companies, when the government spends trillions and needs more. Crazy.

 

[N_LaRUE]

Or maybe just people with common sense? Because that's all it takes. I am a Libertarian myself but I can't say for certain that everyone else is.

Tell you what, since you have such common sense, what is common sense? Your perspective? Do you really know what's going on? How informed are you? What experience do you have in dealing with the situations you seem to know so much about that it should be 'common sense'?

Things are always more complex then then seem. People who think things are easy have usually always had it easy. Have you ever hear the term, 'try walking in my shoes'?

Live in your little libertarian bubble all you want. I'll deal with reality. Thanks.

 

[N_LaRUE]

Just because Finland's government is stupid enough to guarantee this service as some "right" doesn't make the act of doing so valid or sustainable.

The right of a certain speed? So if a storm comes through and wipes out the service in an area, those citizens can accuse the government of violating their right?

Seriously, this is just stupid.

Um, your argument is nonsensical. What the 'right' to broadband has to do with is having a certain speed to everyone's home available. I'm assuming, logically since I haven't read the bill, because the Finnish government isn't stupid, that there are clauses for weather conditions and outages, etc.

What the right is for is that everyone should have the same advantage as everyone else, regardless of where there live. Finland is semi-socialist in nature. There's nothing wrong with the idea.

They also have the right to pick berries and mushrooms in the forest regardless if it's on someone's property as long as it's not on 'farmed' land. It's a refreshing idea. It may be hard for someone who may be from a culture where 'selfishness' is the key factor of life to understand.

 

[ajst222]

Tell you what, since you have such common sense, what is common sense? Your perspective? Do you really know what's going on? How informed are you? What experience do you have in dealing with the situations you seem to know so much about that it should be 'common sense'?

Things are always more complex then then seem. People who think things are easy have usually always had it easy. Have you ever hear the term, 'try walking in my shoes'?

Live in your little libertarian bubble all you want. I'll deal with reality. Thanks.

First of all, don't insult me. Don't just assume I've had it easy. Don't make judgments about my life. Second of all, don't make generalizations about Libertarians or any political ideology for that matter. I don't have any respect for people who say things like "I hate all Republicans" or "I will never vote Democrat". Making decisions based just on an ideology is a poor idea. It is an excuse for people to choose a side instead of actually learning about the issues.

Your entire first paragraph makes no sense. It's so vague that I can't even answer any of those questions. Was that a poor attempt at creating rhetorical questions in order to make you seem like you know everything? And I'll let you elaborate on that "Libertarian bubble" you referred to. I could go on and say the same thing about a "socialist bubble" or a "communist bubble" but I won't because I am open minded. I don't squash and completely reject, dismiss, or insult something just because I don't agree.

 

[N_LaRUE]

You're right, I passes judgment when I shouldn't and I apologize. Also, no I don't know everything, just widely experienced.

You're comment, just common sense, irritated me because it is simplistic. Nothing is simple when dealing with society.

I can provide a whole list of things to me that I believe is common sense, doesn't mean anyone would agree with me.

As for political ideologies, there are none that I agree with as they all make assumptions based on loose theories in social structures. Also most political parties don't even follow their own idealism anymore.

 

[ajst222]

You're right, I passes judgment when I shouldn't and I apologize. Also, no I don't know everything, just widely experienced.

You're comment, just common sense, irritated me because it is simplistic. Nothing is simple when dealing with society.

I can provide a whole list of things to me that I believe is common sense, doesn't mean anyone would agree with me.

As for political ideologies, there are none that I agree with as they all make assumptions based on loose theories in social structures. Also most political parties don't even follow their own idealism anymore.

First off, congratulations, you just reached 1,000 posts lol. But I agree about political ideologies. While I say that I am a Libertarian, I just say that because it best describes my viewpoints on issues. I don't/won't blindly support someone just based on their party. That is what bothers me the most. And yes, political parties definitely have strayed away from their roots.

 

[Reflexx]

People like manufactured "rights" because it gives them something for nothing. And if it's a "right", they don't have to feel guilty about it. They don't feel like they are taking from others. (even though in the case of broadband they are)

What really happened here is that government oppressed one group in order to earn favor with a larger group. It was a bribe.

Unfortunately, these new "rights" end up being the exact opposite of what they claim. When your new rights require work from others, then you have just taken away some of their true rights and freedom. They are now forced to serve you.

 

[N_LaRUE]

First off, congratulations, you just reached 1,000 posts lol. But I agree about political ideologies. While I say that I am a Libertarian, I just say that because it best describes my viewpoints on issues. I don't/won't blindly support someone just based on their party. That is what bothers me the most. And yes, political parties definitely have strayed away from their roots.

Agreed. I just decide to not label myself at all. I just simply say, a little to the left. Though I wouldn't call myself left, center, right or liberal etc. I think ideas in all have merit but I find the extremes just that. The unfortunate part there is no simple solution and I don't find any of the political or social structures really suitable for our current situation. Every one of them is flawed. Also the extremes at the moment are the most vocal and tend to go out of their way to making things seem simple when they are not. If it was simple then it would have been fixed by now. Of course there are those in power that don't it fixed cause it suits them.

 

[spaulagain]

Um, your argument is nonsensical. What the 'right' to broadband has to do with is having a certain speed to everyone's home available. I'm assuming, logically since I haven't read the bill, because the Finnish government isn't stupid, that there are clauses for weather conditions and outages, etc.

What the right is for is that everyone should have the same advantage as everyone else, regardless of where there live. Finland is semi-socialist in nature. There's nothing wrong with the idea.

They also have the right to pick berries and mushrooms in the forest regardless if it's on someone's property as long as it's not on 'farmed' land. It's a refreshing idea. It may be hard for someone who may be from a culture where 'selfishness' is the key factor of life to understand.

Again, the term "right" in this circumstance is being watered down to practically nothing. There are "clauses" as to when your right may be inactive or "out of order?" That is not a right. That is just a social service provided by law. Calling it a right is foolish and just a politicians way to get votes.

Selfishness is not the key factor of life to understand in the US. Just because we are not some socialist "everyone shares everything with everyone" country doesn't make us selfish.

The US (its citizens) tops the charts every year as either one of the most charitable, or THE most charitable nation in the world. And we're selfish?

We are individualists, but that doesn't mean we are selfish.

 

[Jazmac]

yes and no, bailing out any industry is wrong should never ever be done. However you are completely misguided if you think the war in Iraq is what caused the economic situation were in. When in fact it had little to nothing to do with it.

Where did the money come from to pay for that search, the lives of those that died, the money to rebuild that countries infrastructure, and replace the weapons we lost in The process?

 

[Reflexx]

A lot depends on this.

Do you believe that you were truly born with certain rights because that is human's natural state?

Or do you believe that you were born without rights and it is up to others to bestow rights upon you?

 

[N_LaRUE]

Again, the term "right" in this circumstance is being watered down to practically nothing. There are "clauses" as to when your right may be inactive or "out of order?" That is not a right. That is just a social service provided by law. Calling it a right is foolish and just a politicians way to get votes.

Selfishness is not the key factor of life to understand in the US. Just because we are not some socialist "everyone shares everything with everyone" country doesn't make us selfish.

The US (its citizens) tops the charts every year as either one of the most charitable, or THE most charitable nation in the world. And we're selfish?

We are individualists, but that doesn't mean we are selfish.

OK the term selfish was wrong but there is a definite 'me' culture in the US. That doesn't mean that it's bad but it's not exactly good either. As for my opinions about charity, I'll just say nothing.

As for this whole idea of rights. We're talking about two different things here. You're going by this idea of 'natural rights' and I'm referring to legal rights. Both have merit but are obviously different things by definition.

Though I have to point out that most rights, both natural and legal have limitations. I can only think of one in the US that may not have any limitations, freedom of speech, so long as you can 'speak' in some form. Though I can't say that for certain as I don't know all the state laws which do impose limitations on rights, legally.

So, yes I agree with your definition but the simple reality there is a 'need' for legal rights as well. Whether you agree with that is up to you.

 

[jonathan sink]

Where did the money come from to pay for that search, the lives of those that died, the money to rebuild that countries infrastructure, and replace the weapons we lost in The process?

Of course all wars cost money. But the collapse in our economy was from decades of out of control spending, and strangling regulations on private business. These wars only cost a very small percentage compared to what were in debt for. Lets not forget either that just in the war years under bush and Obama what were paying in wars compared to the rest of the out of control spending doesn't compare either. Factor that with all of the blood sucking government bureaucracies again over the last 60 years and you have the problem.