[Myrddin]

Cellular service is a business contract. If you need more, then you need to pay for it. It costs money to put up towers, pull fiber optics and setup switching equipment. There is no right to free bandwidth. The "network neutrality" argument would force Verizon to give away service and bandwidth on equipment they have purchased with capital funds. That equipment is purchased with a specified level of service load and working lifetime. The intent is to earn sufficient review to repay the investment costs and maintenance/operation costs. "Free" service doesn't pay the bills. Net neutrality is fundamentally expropriation of private business assets by government fiat.

[IYAS9YAS]

There is no right to free bandwidth.

They're not talking about usage, they're talking about data throttling. If the government has plans with "unlimited data" then the data should be unlimited with no throttling. Same for you or me. If you advertise that capacity, and make me pay a higher price for that capacity, there should be no "throttling" of that capacity because I'm making full use of that capacity.

If the government was on a plan with a data cap, and the government went over its data cap, then the contract would have provided for that, and they'd have been billed for it. But throttling speeds is bovine excrement.

[Mariner]

“If you need more, then you need to pay for it.”

The same argument applies to the internet backbone carriers.

Net Neutrality is expropriation of their property. And most of the expropriation is by the CONTENT providers...like Google, Facebook etc.

[Mears]

“”Free” service doesn’t pay the bills.”

---

And it doesn’t keep my pension check coming.:-)

.