The only thing you have said that I agree with is enforcement of the agreement that was previously paid. They need to fulfill the contract they agreed to when they were paid. Nationalizing the data infrastructure is not the solution

Alse- you're an idiot if it makes you happy

You're making the mistaken assumption that I vote republican... This has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with not wasting money. Government intervention almost always increases costs in the long run.

What do you suggest next. Shall we provide water hookups to every house in the country? 5 million for each house bumba fuck nowhere, but don't worry the tax payer will pay for it from our unlimited funds. This kind of reckless spending is what drives inflation that we must now suffer. Low income groups are hurt the most.

I guess using your logic, urban groups who make the most should be subsidizing car costs for rural populations without access to mass transit

Lol No... Maybe you need to look in the mirror when making statements like that. You are suggesting that we give corporations lots of money for work that isn't economically justified. I don't know what about this has to do with "standing up to government".

I don't think we should be wasting money to bury a bunch of fiber when it's not economically viable. On top of that government programs add even more bureaucracy further inflating the cost. I'd rather just get a starlink, mobile broadband, radio internet, etc...

Your the idiot

I disprove your thesis

Maybe it's because they are simply acting selflessly to stand up for what's best for the country. The government is not exactly know for being an efficient allocator of capital.

Would you say it's amusing if I voted against a bill that would pay me 10 million a year by increasing taxes on the lowest bracket?

You are right about YouTube. I don't think it's appropriate to ban adds on social media as long as they are clearly marked, if traditional media is allowed to. It should be both can or neither can.

I guess what is the thought process on why there shouldn't be adds? Don't misunderstand me, I think it might be a great idea. At the same time I think it would be almost impossible to pass legislation like that. Way to much money/power behind buying elections.

Fair point I guess. Then what makes it so different from traditional media?

What would the rationale be for that? I mean why would adds on social media platforms be different than say YouTube or tv?