[quote=@DarkwolfX37]
<Snipped quote by Dynamics>

If you're going to have a government then do it right. And there are countless cases in history of the government doing single things well enough. It's not an "the government is always wrong" it's "the government is often wrong." You wouldn't be arguing against the laws preventing manual child labor in factories, and if the government came out with something actually stopping the bullshit monopolies by taking extra control over ISPs then you wouldn't be saying "oh that's automatically bad because it's the government." You're just using the government as a boogyman because it happens to align with your position this one time. Doing that often enough puts this incorrect idea that the government can't do any good into someone. This is your monthly anarchist reminder that governments exist to limit human flaws by banding together with enough threat of force that the people can't compete thereby forcing them to limit their shitty selves. You have to limit markets or there won't be a market, the only workable capitalism is regulated capitalism. The only question is whether the regulation is extensive or not, and the regulations on ISPs aren't good enough. 
And Trump gave half his responsibilities to his kids, what's your point? Rather than fixing what he's in charge of to do better, he's trying to get rid of something that worked and shovel off responsibility to another group. Are you really trying to say that the FTC has less work than the FCC to the point that it's a good idea to shift the work? Because that's not the case. 
[/quote]

You [i]don't[/i] have to have the government—that's why this is a problem. The government exists to protect citizens from threats and promote a better lifestyle for the nation as a whole, and it's been proven time and time again that they do [i]not[/i] do their jobs properly when it comes to the free market. Want to argue that they're great with safety regulations? Sure, why not (even though they do a poor job at that too). Want to argue that they do fine with keeping us safe from hostile invaders? Sure, I'll even agree with you there. But Title II makes the internet a government-controlled commodity, and there is [i]no [/i]instance of a net gain from the government ever taking over any part of the free market. Even making a standard baseline of needs is fine for a government, but Title II grants them all but full control. I figured you'd care about personal privacy considering what the government has literally already done to violate the privacy of its citizens with NSA spying, and this would just open the hole wider for the FCC to step in and do the same. It's not setting up the government as a personal boogeyman—it's knowing what they do and do not do well (which happens to be a lot in this day and age). Controlling a market is one of those things the government does very, [i]very[/i] poorly.

But it [i]didn't[/i] work. Rates already have gone through the roof and competition continues to die. The [i]only[/i] thing the government is good for in this instance is trust-busting; they failed when it came to keeping up standards and they failed when it came to protecting consumers. I'm not saying the FTC has less work, but I am saying that the FTC does a better job.