"is there such a thing as neutral on this? you're either for or against net neutrality. the only neutral people are those people who are not involved/don't care. and I don't really care to hear from those people. "

You kind of answered your own question. There is such a thing as neutral on this, you just don't like to hear from them :) Actually, i'm pretty neutral, surprisingly, and i don't really care that much, so i'd fall into your latter category. I only commented because of how much bs the original comment was. Personally, i don't care mainly because neither side actually gives a crap about me. Only their bottom line. That isn't going to change anytime soon. It's certainly not going to change while the FCC is literally appointed by two parties.

"also the universal service fund is paid for by you and me. the rate we pay is calculated based on what they need to spend and not vice versa. so if we don't pay for 1/3rd of us households we will pay less tax and the fund will be smaller"

This isn't quite true due to how the forecasting is done, but sure, it's lose enough But we could also stop paying the billions to the telecoms and instead, pay for 1/3rd of the households, for the same price. :)

But you are also saying that 1/3rd of households fall into this category:

"Establishes a National Eligibility Verifier to verify eligible Lifeline subscribers. Eligibility will be based on participation in SNAP, Medicaid, SSI, Federal Public Housing Assistance, the Veterans *Pension benefit program, current Tribal qualifying programs, or those who can demonstrate income of less than 135 percent of the federal poverty guidelines."

If 34% of america falls into that category, then we pretty much better do something anyway!