Where do libertarians stand on net neutrality?
(Read article summary)
The House recently voted to overturn the FCC's net neutrality rules. Here are nine ways to make sense of a complicated issue.
As reported on Wired, “The House of Representatives voted Friday to overturn net neutrality rules created by the FCC in December.” Obama said he will veto it.
Net Neutrality is complicated. It’s hard for some libertarians to figure out where to stand on it.
Here’s how I view it:
- It’s bad that the state helps cartelize industry.
- It’s bad that ISPs etc. probably have more market power than they otherwise would, and that there is less competition than there would be.
- But this is the state’s fault.
- Given it’s the state’s fault, should the state use its antitrust power/FTC power to block mergers or to break companies apart? I say no. You can’t trust the state that caused the problem in the first place to solve it by exercising unlibertarian and unconstitutional power and law.
- Given the current regime of state-intervention-caused limited competition, should the FCC impose Net Neutrality rules? I say no.
- Given that the FCC did impose Net Neutrality rules, should Congress override them? I say a tepid yes.
- Given that Congress did the right thing, should Obama veto it? No.
- Will he anyway? Yes.
- Are we doomed? Yes. (Kidding. I hope.)
Add/view comments on this post.
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on the link above.