I believe we should keep Net Neutrality since according toWhatIs.com, Net Neutrality is referred to as the "First Amendment of the Internet." Who wants a two-tiered model where carriers would be able to charge owners of Web sites. This extra fee will only fall back on us the consumer and with the hard times I feel we have enough trouble. These additional fees and other charges aren't what we need. Sites like this for blogging would most likely cease to exist because they would be unable to compete in a tiered service model. The Web is a great opportunity for small businesses to grow and without net neutrality it would put a damper on this. I almost compare this to how most schools passed the pay to play where students have to pay to play sports. Like the next big Web page or the next big sports star they might not be able to shine because not having the money to do so. Net Neutrality keeps that from happening. Proponents of the two-tiered model point out that a tiered business model already exists: consumers have a choice of using a slower dial-up service or paying a premium price for faster speed over cable or DSL (WhatIs.com). They go on to say that it would help carriers be able to offer more services like Internet-based cable TV programming and video at competitive rates. This would be a good thing but there's no guarantee. Money rules everything therefore the Web owners could start being charged and rates could still stay the same or even rise. All in all I feel like the we are where we need to be and no changes need to be made.
Computer Glossary, Computer Terms - Technology Definitions and Cheat Sheets from WhatIs.com -
The Tech Dictionary and IT Encyclopedia. Ed. Ivy Wigmore. 27 Oct. 2009. Web. 03 Nov. 2010.
<http://whatis.techtarget.com/>.