Originally posted by @thinkofone
lol. Seriously? Seems like the point was to provide a very simple depiction of the very basic issue of net neutrality that could be easily understood by pretty much anyone. Why did you expect anything more than that?
In fact the text that accompanies the video pretty much says just that:
[quote]The repeal of Net Neutrality is a hot topic in America, ...[text shortened]... e. Or money-centered people. Perhaps like you?
Once again, the operative word here is SHOULD.
But it leaves out some very important details to the argument!
A massive amount of rural America has limited access to internet with low download speeds or none at all because of net neutrality. There is no economic reason for the free market to compete if they are not going to be able to up charge for the service. Massive infrastructure cost would be incurred to the ISP companies at a loss, due to the net neutrality bill.
So how did Obama expect to run internet service like a public utility, when a vast portion of the public does not have access to the utility? Was there taxpayer subsidization in the bill that was going to bring the internet to all of America? I bet you'll find there was none, he just wanted to provide the internet where it was politically convenient to do so, the urban areas.
The non neutral BK whopper video should have shown the register with 125 million people around it, and 50 million people stuck on the outside trying to get a freaking burger, but can't because the 125 million that are being served nearest the register are always hungry. There is no reason for BK to fight through the crowds to deliver the burgers to those perpetually outside.