Net Neutrality. What's In It For the Government?

    By now, most everyone has likely heard about net neutrality, and what it is supposed to prevent. If you haven't heard by now, net neutrality is supposed to stop ISP's from blocking users from web content as they see fit.

    Net neutrality is the US Gov'ts plan to make sure that ISP's do not restrict content to its users. Sounds great, right? Maybe not. When the government promises something, it almost always comes with a price. It is almost like a deal with the devil. You get something you want, in exchange for far greater cost.

    Take 9/11 for instance. After the terrorist attacks, our government offered us more security, but for that security, we would have to give up a bunch of our freedom in exchange. The American people didn't care, they just wanted the illusion of safety and gave it all up without a fight.

    Another example would be the Affordable Care Act. Sounds great, right? Everyone can have health care now! For the poor, this is a win/win situation. For those who are well off, this has no effect, as they were covered already. But, for those who are living week to week, are above the poverty threshold, but under insured or not insured at all, the mandate hits them the hardest. 

    They cant afford the premiums and deductions, which now puts them in greater financial difficulty. Or, they are forced to opt out of the mandate and pay a tax penalty that they cant afford to pay at the end of the year. The gov't giveth, and the gov't taketh away. 

    So what will enforced net neutrality give us? Will it simply penalize ISP's for blocking traffic to sites that are unwilling to pay the ISP's ransom? Or will it be like so many other gestures of gov't benevolence, and come with the hidden price tag of more stolen freedom?