[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

The problem I have with the whole "they haven't done this before so what means they will now" debate is that companies every day try new concepts to increase profit margins. Americans are going to eat up regardless of whether or not they like it, because the internet is as much a part of people's lives as eating lunch now.

We didn't have net neutrality regulations until 2014, yet the internet grew pretty healthily all the while:

from the same article:

But in 2002, the FCC decided that broadband was a luxury, not a necessity, and classified it as an optional "information service" rather than as a "communication service" and a public utility. As a result, except in special cases, broadband providers were not obligated to open up their lines to competitors. The providers were only obligated to play by vague net-neutrality-ish rules.

The FCC did belatedly reclassify broadband as a communication service in 2015, but only because Verizon persuaded a judge to nullify the existing weak net-neutrality rules. (That reclassification is what the FCC now plans to reverse.) But the FCC still didn't force broadband providers to open up their lines; it mandated only that they not block any internet content.

Surprisingly, with a few exceptions, net-neutrality advocates have said little about the advantages of opening up broadband to free-market competition. It's the simplest and easiest way to make broadband cheaper and faster for consumers. The ISPs are probably happy that few U.S. customers have considered this issue and instead are worried about net neutrality.