said by JazzJRabbit :

What I'm arguing with pnh is not enforcing the laws, this is just the context, it's his position. One day he argues for complete removal of any government oversight and the next day he is all for government intervention. So, who is dumb now? You.

said by wifi4milez :

I suppose I could let pnh102 answer for himself, but I MUST say something. You clearly dont have any idea about, well, anything! Citizens and private companies cant enforce laws (unless they are deputized, and thats another discussion) so your argument makes no sense. Citizens and companies follow/obey laws, government creates/enforces laws. Get it? Good! Your post is so dumb I dont even know why I am responding, but I am really looking out for you. You are only going to dig yourself deeper into a hole if you keep adding to this "argument" of yours.

said by pnh102 :

The last i checked, the government is charged with enforcing the law. This is not done by private companies.

And again, you've proven my point about how badly the government is doing a job of that when it doesn't even enforce the laws on the books.

Asking that the government simply do the job it is supposed to be doing is not the same as saying that the government should not usurp ownership of a private industry.

said by JazzJRabbit :

OK, let me be crystal clear since you are going to be running around the isuue forever otherwise. You've made your entire point yesterday (see here »Seize the Incumbent Networks) that government cannot do anything effectively, be it public schools, amtrak, securing borders, social security/welfare services or even interstate highways. And you argued profusely that businesses know best and that "The assumption that government control of the Internet would result in decent service & competitive business is wrong". You said it just yesterday. So why are you turning to the government now to regulate the industry? I thought that "anything good that happens in this country is the result of hard working people and elbow grease, not the government". So why not let the hard working people of verizon (with some help from uncle sam elbow grease) handle the issue? Why do you want government to intervene now if they can't get anything right?

said by JazzJRabbit :

So why are you turning to the government now to regulate the industry?

said by JazzJRabbit :

I thought deregulation was the key? Let the private enterprises do what they are doing since governments obviously can't do a better job?

Changing sides much?

said by pnh102 :

Huh?

There are laws against false advertising and there are government agencies that are tasked with enforcing these laws. Verizon cannot legally advertise a service as being "unlimited" and then impose some sort of limit. Either Verizon should make it very clear in the advertising what the limit is, or simply stop using the word "Unlimited."

said by JazzJRabbit :

...since the government obviously can't do a better job?

said by JazzJRabbit :

I thought deregulation was the key? Let the private enterprises do what they are doing since governments obviously can't do a better job?

Changing sides much?

said by oliphant :

If Verizon is capping at around 10GB that is still pretty generous and they should simply advertise it as such rather than lie in their advertising.

Unlimited = unlimited

Anything less than unlimited is a lie and Verizon should be held accountable for their deceptive advertising practices.

said by oliphant :

Anything less than unlimited is a lie and Verizon should be held accountable for their deceptive advertising practices.