All kinds of people. The middle and upper middle are responsible for the carrying out of policies.
People at the bottom are like myself and my wife. We do the actual implementation.
We get our jobs by applying for them. Job listings are at USAJobs.gov
eh - only partly. The litigators still have the same cases on their desks; but the funding cuts slowed them down. The only thing that REALLY changed was the "official statements" and the speed with which those people hired under previous administrations get to do their jobs.Just look at how the EPA has changed under the Trump admin.
...what 87% of Americans now understand in their bones -- is that internet freedom matters because that's where human freedom comes from in a society wired together by the internet. Everything we do today involves the internet. Everything we do tomorrow will require it. If we don't have a free, fair and open internet infrastructure, we're screwed. People care about internet access for the same reason they care about shelter, and water, and heat, and food: not because they're architecture fanciers or gourmands -- because human flourishing requires these things....
Because we rely on these private providers to make our businesses function, our speech flow, and our new enterprises take flight, these companies have to be burdened with public obligations. We've got a perfectly good law on the books—the one the Obama administration used as the source of its power to issue its rules. Now all we have to do is resolve to use it....
They're still subject to the usual monopoly rules, aren't they? AT&T was already broken up before the net became an issue, and then they clawed their way back for some reason I do not get.
But I am genuinely alarmed about these private companies censoring the socio-political contributions of private individuals as they have begun to do. This is a formula for controlling the outcome of elections.
I can believe that, but as I said before, I can stomach that. It is not a new phenomenon. But I am genuinely alarmed about these private companies censoring the socio-political contributions of private individuals as they have begun to do. This is a formula for controlling the outcome of elections.
You'll be glad to learn that if a private company is violating the terms of the contract you entered into with them, by censoring your contributions in violation of the contract terms, you can pursue them for damages.
Of course, if you haven't entered into a contract with them - for example, by using a service which is offered online for free - then that company can conduct their business as they like, and decide what content is or is not acceptable. To pick an example at random, websites that are centered around a particular religious belief can set their own standards of conduct that posters must adhere to based on those principles.
Obviously, if you find such things genuinely alarming, then lobby your government to prevent private companies censoring the free services they choose to provide to individuals - with all the consequences that entails.
If it's so great, why are only the Democrats for it?
What makes it bad for Republicans?
It's interesting how many times posters say "then the voters can change things" or "lobby the government for a change later" as an argument in favor of doing the wrong thing in the first place!
I don't think that Christian Forums and Google are comparable.Do you think this forum has a right to decide which forums users can post in, based on their beliefs, and to censor content that doesn't meet their guidelines? Or is that another example of "doing the wrong thing in the first place"? If you think private companies should not be able to apply guidelines to the content they accept in a free online service, that would apply here as much as anywhere else.
Does anyone here have a better understanding of what the term "net neutrality" means than before this thread? Or has anyone changed their minds about whether or not net neutrality is a positive stance to take in a capitalistic society?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?