Ha! I'm not sure who you're trying to convince, I keep saying I agree with you! I'm merely phrasing things a little differently. A fully free market with no re

Ha! I'm not sure who you're trying to convince, I keep saying I agree with you! I'm merely phrasing things a little differently. A fully free market with no regulation or intervention, as you point out, is frequently impossible. Especially with in infrastructure where natural monopolies abound. Free markets have a tendency to become monopolies or abusive without efforts to maintain competition, and as you point out we have to encourage competition. But this requires making tradeoffs. The person who put the cable in the ground feels they are free in this (theoretical, but non-existent) free market, to charge whoever they want whatever they want to use the cable. The person using the cable has no choice but to accept those terms because there isn't effective competition. Wheeler chooses the freedom of the consumer to choose versus the freedom of the provider in order to favor competition among providers. I agree with this balance, Wheeler was good, I don't like this new guy at all so far. My original objective was to try to explore the other guy's point of view, to give some of the arguments they would give in favor. I find them unconvincing, but those are the arguments those opposed to net neutrality give.