FCC is trying to end net neutrality. This is what it can look like.

[fatslob-:O]

Pemalite said:

The difference is... That AT&T scheme will apply to ALL video on their network. The Netflix issue was just discrimination against Netflix.
Not even remotely the same.

AT&T will also be giving consumers the ability to turn off that data-saving feature as well, which was mentioned in that link you provided.

Now the other issue is your internet providers blatant false advertising.
If you advertise your internet packages as Unlimited, it damn well should be unlimited.
Australia had a similar issue to that once before where Internet connections were sold as unlimited... But actually had caps which then introduced throttling once a limit was reached. - The Government of course stepped in and applied some new industry regulation to resolve that issue.
See here: https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/optus-unlimited-advertisements-declared-misleading-and-deceptive

Your Government is slow to act and should take the same course of action against providers who are also falsely advertising packages.

There are no excuses, it's anti-consumer.

Stop the unlimited internet lies... Don't introduce Micro-transactions for Internet connections... And your telecommunications industry would be far better off... Especially for consumers.

Makes sense once we consider that video streaming takes up 70% of the entire internet's traffic ... 

Throttling bandwidth is a reality with unlimited data plans ... (ISPs only advertise unlimited data, not unlimited connection bandwidth) 

Again, no such thing as net neutrality in our modern world. I don't see it as a politics problem anymore but as an engineering problem ... 

Pemalite said: 

The USA also has high cancer rates to begin with.. And some cancers your country actually falls short. - You do know that a prevention is better than a cure right? An amazing health system is one that educates people on that very fact.

Here you fall behind my country in Colorectal cancer 5-year survival rates:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_quality_of_healthcare

You are of course slightly ahead in breast cancer and lschemic Stroke,  but are absolutely terrible in cervical cancer survival rates... Do poorer in heart attack and Hemorrhagic stroke.
Not seeing this "superiority" in your health system.

I do realize that prevention is the best method to healthcare and I highly advocate it for it's high cost savings efficiency but only 40% of the cancers can be considered preventable ... 

In the vast majority of cancers, the US manages to come out on top ... 

Treatments in CAR-T cell therapies will also keep america in the lead as we take our first step in having a reliable solution to blood cancers ... (no country can come close to the innovations that the US has made in medical science and it will continue in the foreseeable future until their policy or demographics changes) 

Pemalite said: 

Majority of measures you fall short. Not just "some".

As for charitable... We have a universal healthcare system, it's also a hybrid system, where those over a certain tax threshold can either pay for private insurance... Or pay more in tax to contribute to our healthcare system.... But it also means that everyone is covered, Homeless, mentally ill, veteran... Everyone, regardless of how much you do/don't earn. That is charitable.
And it works, the statistics don't lie... And even after all the evidence I have provided... If you continue to disagree with it, then there really is no point in continuing this discussion.

I mean. We even have more beds per-capita.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_OECD_countries_by_hospital_beds
And higher life expectancy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

You can't make this stuff up. Your system is expensive, over priced and under delivers.

"Under deliver" is a matter of perspective and most americans are content with the current healthcare system. It's as you said, "it's not broken, no need to fix it" since nearly 2/3 of the population are fine with it ...  

Here, I thought that being charitable meant attaining equity but I guess those with rare cancers will have to fend for themselves since the rest of the world is not up to the task of offering any higher quality of life ... 

Yes, the statistics don't lie but don't just contend that a few specific systems being omnipotent against another when that is not the case since the majority of nationalized healthcare systems fall behind in cancer research, the creation of new molecular entities (the US ALONE creates over 40% of the NMEs) or poorer palliative care since most national programs don't think it's worth covering drugs such as Avastin, Sutent, Yervoy and Provenge to extend the life of terminally ill patients for a few months if it means saving lots of money in the end since the patients have poor short term prognosis either way ... (Not even the likes of Australia is impervious to this since they don't want to cover a good portion of expensive cancer drugs)

Yeap, the US healthcare system is definitely not charitable. In fact it's so heartless that it's the only country with decent end of life care, oops ... 

Puppyroach said:

Ofcourse you look at other countries and what they do, that is exactly what every country does all the time, including the US =). Why do you otherwise think that you have public schools, public transportation, publically funded police and fire department, a governmental system with inspiration from Europe? You can´t possibly be so naive as to think those ideas formed out of a bubble with no influence from other nations? The same goes with net neutrality: ISP´s in the US will ofcourse look at how ISP´s in other nations have been succesful at monetizing the lack of net neutrality and therefore you need to also look at how other countries does it.

And the example with healthcare, seriously... Medicare and Medicade was formed as an inspiration from how the UK finance its public healthcare.

@Bold LOL, are serious ? The US is one of the very few oldest federal republics that has attained universal suffrage so how much can that be said of other countries who still have either a monarchy or doesn't have any sort of suffrage ? 

FYI, copying what other countries are doing isn't possible in a lot of cases ... (US uses more high end drugs than any other nation so getting the same cost benefits isn't possible) 

Reaching the same per capita GDP as Qatar is nearly impossible since it's the second largest exporter of natural gas ...