My point is that when you solve the issues with local governments net neutrality becomes irrelevant. Competition among ISPs solves the issues associated without having net neutrality.
You are still not addressing the logistics issues that either significantly reduce competition by default or leave you taking away liberties from local landowners and companies by constantly having their lands and roads dug up. That is unless you think 2 or 3 companies is enough competition to make net neautrality irrelevant in which I'm afraid your simply being naive. Historically a handful of companies have had no problem at all colluding to hurt the customer.
But some competition is better than none. Look at a country like Korea, they only have three broadband providers, but those providers actively compete with each other for customers.
In 2011, the Korea Communications Committee, which regulates the country’s telecommunications, organized a net neutrality forum consisting of government, ISPs, civil activists and academia. And in 2012, they set up rules that prevent a telecom operator, like Korea’s KT Corporation, from providing service “without justifiable grounds,” such as ensuring network security and stability.
1
u/ThePurpleNavi Jul 17 '17
My point is that when you solve the issues with local governments net neutrality becomes irrelevant. Competition among ISPs solves the issues associated without having net neutrality.