how-to block ads
|
Comments on news posted 2008-12-07 10:57:23: As long as we're handing out billions to companies for back rubs and bonuses, there's a growing contingent in Congress who thinks we should spend a few million on infrastructure to help stimulate the economy, and some of that funding could be going t.. ..
| |
 neufuse
join:2006-12-06
Indiana, PA | misinterpertation .. i bet people will miss interperte the "invented the internet" comment... and turn this into an al gore joke | |
| | soothsayer15
join:2002-03-01
Irving, TX | Re: misinterpertation We did invent the Internet through DARPA. | |
| | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| I think it's more likely the misinterpretation will be that something useful will actually be accomplished.
as much as something needs to be done about broadband in the U.S. I doubt the right things will be done. There is enough waste right now in the USF and E-rate programs to probably fund fiber to every home in the U.S.
so the number one item is it's likely no new money is really needed - just take the billions that are wasted and re-direct the other billions that aren't from these programs and put it into a well planned program to ensure universal broadband deployment.
the second item is if any of this money goes to the incumbents it's a waste and the U.S. will get no closer to universal broadband than we are now.
broadband is like health care in the U.S.: we know it sux and we know what needs to be done to fix it, but making it happen is opposed by powerful interest groups that have been very successful at preventing change. | |
| | | 
pkap
@omcastbusiness.net
 from:
viperlmw 
thumbs down from:
dentman42
| Re: misinterpertation The E-rate program is a fantastic program that helps connect schools and libraries to the Internet. There has been some fraud in the past, but it is a VERY small percentage of the dollars.
If you are interested in waste, fraud and abuse, look at all the billions wasted in Iraq!!!! | |
| | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| said by nasadude :broadband is like health care in the U.S.: we know it sux and we know what needs to be done to fix it, but making it happen is opposed by powerful interest groups that have been very successful at preventing change. I greatly disagree with this statement. The biggest problems are trying to get past the corporations but I don't agree with it anyway.
I do agree that a fiber network should be built throughout the nation to every business and home that any provider can lease to access any customer anywhere to obtain any service they want. However, I think that network needs to be government owned and then managed by 1 or more companies none of which is Comcast, Cox, At&t and so on.
In addition, I greatly disagree with universal health care. You want health care? Get a job and get it. Can't get a job? Get a skill and make yourself marketable. | |
| | | | 
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
1 edit | Re: misinterpertation said by Skippy25 :In addition, I greatly disagree with universal health care. You want health care? Get a job and get it. Can't get a job? Get a skill and make yourself marketable. What's perverted about that position is that our health care *is* socialized already. We've used public law to create levels of quality that wouldn't exist in a truly "free market." As a result, we've denied lessor products and services to people who would be willing to buy and sell them. This is under threat of jail. And then when people complain they can't afford the resulting artificially limited and costly "market", we talk about it in terms of "free markets."
As if what we have is, and subsidizing it wouldn't be. That's just plain wrong.
Mark | |
| | | | 
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
2 edits | said by Skippy25 :In addition, I greatly disagree with universal health care. You want health care? Get a job and get it. Can't get a job? Get a skill and make yourself marketable. It would be great if it was not already "socialized". Frankly the best way to go would be to outlaw all forms of medical insurance and require everyone to pay as they go. This would remove the price amplification effect that insurance provides. Doctors and Hospitals would have much less paperwork and prices would have to come down otherwise people would simply refuse to use their services and I doubt they would want to go out of business. Market forces would come into play. To some extent you see it already with the new Health Savings Accounts where the employee has to kick in a significant amount of money up front before the insurance kicks in. They are making less Doctor visits and the Doctor's are starting to take notice.
However as I pointed out we already have socialized medicine. The only problem is that it applies to select groups of individuals. Take my home state of New York (please):
1) If you are 18 or younger, you can be covered by the states' Child Health Plus plan.
2) If you are over 65 and some number of months, you can get Medicare courtesy of the Federal government.
3) If you are too poor or are here illegally, Medicaid and the taxpayers will cover you.
For those of us who do have jobs and pay taxes, we are at the mercy of our employers maintaining their plans and the ever increasing deductions and co-pays the insurance companies demand in order to boost profits.
So it is a great idea that we should all "get a job and get it" but that assumes the job will provide it. If you want to become self-employed, you are probably starting out with about a $6K to $10K deficit right off the bat to cover the health insurance bill. | |
| | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: misinterpertation said by n2jtx :However as I pointed out we already have socialized medicine. You make some good points, but your definition of "socialized" needs expansion. It's not just recipients of subsidized health care, it is also those who can afford to pay for health care who are benefiting from society's use of public law to create an artificial market of higher-quality products and services than would exist in an unregulated market.
It's great for people like me who can afford health care. My "caveat emptor" is reduced. I can shop around for products and services with a higher likelihood that those products and services will adhere to *my* standards. I don't have as much responsibility to research the seller's credentials or history.
But, the cost of this benefit to me is the complete elimination of willing buyers and sellers of lessor-quality products and services. Now they're forced to sell/buy what *I'm* willing to pay. If they can't afford that, then they have no options.
And, if they suggest that the society who benefits from this arrangement should subsidize them (universal health care), they're told *they're* socialists.
It's perverted. Land of the free. Home of the Brave.
Mark | |
| 
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
|  Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals
»otrans.3cdn.net/29c88c58d173f3b3···zck9.mp3
Story:
»news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081206/pl···omyobama
US President-elect Barack Obama on Saturday vowed to make the largest investment in the country's infrastructure since the 1950s and bolster development of broadband Internet connections as part of his program to create 2.5 million new jobs.
In his weekly radio address on Saturday, the president-elect unveiled five specific components of the plan that he believes will help the country overcome the recession.
Obama also vowed to increase the accessibility of broadband Internet connections in the United States, making them available to schoolchildren and hospitals.
"It is unacceptable that the United States ranks 15th in the world in broadband adoption," he said. "Here, in the country that invented the Internet, every child should have the chance to get online, and they'll get that chance when I'm president -- because that's how we'll strengthen America's competitiveness in the world."
The president-elect also said the government must ensure that hospitals are connected to each other through the Internet. The promises sound great. But most schools, libraries and hospitals already are broadband connected based on the 100s of millions the USF funneled to states and ISPs. Spending tax dollars there is mostly redundant and will have little effect on moving the US from 15th place.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
| | 
Xizer
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by TKJunkMail :Here is a recording of the radio address on his economic plans, including expanding broadband internet: » otrans.3cdn.net/29c88c58d173f3b3···zck9.mp3Story: » news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081206/pl···omyobamaUS President-elect Barack Obama on Saturday vowed to make the largest investment in the country's infrastructure since the 1950s and bolster development of broadband Internet connections as part of his program to create 2.5 million new jobs.
In his weekly radio address on Saturday, the president-elect unveiled five specific components of the plan that he believes will help the country overcome the recession.
Obama also vowed to increase the accessibility of broadband Internet connections in the United States, making them available to schoolchildren and hospitals.
"It is unacceptable that the United States ranks 15th in the world in broadband adoption," he said. "Here, in the country that invented the Internet, every child should have the chance to get online, and they'll get that chance when I'm president -- because that's how we'll strengthen America's competitiveness in the world."
The president-elect also said the government must ensure that hospitals are connected to each other through the Internet. The promises sound great. But most schools, libraries and hospitals already are broadband connected based on the 100s of millions the USF funneled to states and ISPs. Spending tax dollars there is mostly redundant and will have little effect on moving the US from 15th place. I agree! Why the hell is Obama spending money on broadband?! We should be spending it on universal healthcare for all! | |
| | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals Broadband is important. Connecting everyone opens the world and opportunities for many. However, should this be a priority right now? I don't think so at this given point. Granted, I think making sure everyone has some form of internet is a top priority. The internet allows on to train, study, research, job hunt, etc. These are imperative in a day and age where knowledge keeps you on top. Sadly, I don't think pumping money into a broadband fun (even if not squandered and thrown at it per say), will do much for our economy. We need to focus on health care, spurring TRUE JOB growth, and fixing our banking system. Then, we can work on the important but not imperative aspects of this country. | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·Comcast
·VOIPo
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by KrK :It's part of a "New Deal" like infrastructure spending package to stimulate the economy and create jobs. It's not just broadband, it's roads, highways, energy efficiency, Govt. Buildings, Broadband, etc etc Yes, it's a huge amount of money... but it's a "stimulus" package of a different color. It's more like a "Raw Deal" if you ask me. Let's throw good public money into things that don't necessarily need to be done, all in the name of helping us out. There are better things that could be done with my hard-earned cash. In the end, we're all going to wind up paying for the junk that Obama is proposing... and paying big. He's nothing but an inexperienced tax-and-spend liberal.
We would be better off if the government just issued refund checks to us all in the amount we've paid in income tax during the past year. If you're looking for a good stimulus package that's it... People would likely use this money to pay off debt, buy new big ticket items, maybe even make a down payment on a new home (assuming they could get a loan for the rest). At any rate, as most would spend this money in some way, the economy would be revived in the end. It's simple, and it's fair to those who work for a living.
--
Save us, oh Great Obamasiah. Peggy Joseph and I both pray that You come to pay our mortgage and fill our cars with gas. (Premium please!) | |
| | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals I disagree with his policy right now, but tax and spend liberal? That'd be a Republican. See Bush and his sinking this country into 6 trillion debt over the last 8 years. Or his dad for about 2-3. Regan for another 1 or so trillion. The only Tax and Spend hacks are the Republicans who BORROW money from Rogue nations (China, Russia, etc), and sell our country out to foreign entities. Albeit, raising inflation, devaluing the U.S. dollar, and making the cost of living sky rocket. Not that Democrats are better financially, but pay as you go is much better than borrowing. Still, both waste our money like it's theirs to blow. | |
| | | | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
| I know. We could always give it to the Banks, the large Corporations, the Energy Giants, etc etc
Oh wait. We've been doing that, and it failed, and crashed and burned. Hmm, a tax and spend liberal eh? Well what we have had is a borrow, borrow, borrow, waste and spend, spend, spend on the select few and it's KILLING US.
Now he has to fix it. It's going to cost us dearly, but at least lay the blame where it is due.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
| | | 
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Yeah because I want my doctor's office run like the local DMV. | |
| | | | 
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by Dogfather :Yeah because I want my doctor's office run like the local DMV. The DMV is a state-run agency. | |
| | | | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP
3 edits | Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals So? You think SSA, VA, FEMA or any other gov't bureaucracy runs any better? That's laughable. Alright, I don't feel safe trusting my life and turning over 1/6 of the GDP to the most greedy, corrupt, incompetent and horribly managed organization in the world. Washington rips on GM for their screw ups when nothing is more screwed up than Washington. If Washington had a decade of straight balanced budgets, didn't ever screw up like they did in Katrina, showed some semblance of fiscal responsibility and competence, I would consider it. But not a moment before.
The gov't is horribly broken and they shouldn't be given any more responsibilities until they get their own house in order. | |
| | | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by Dogfather :The gov't is horribly broken and they shouldn't be given any more responsibilities until they get their own house in order. Look, something has to change with health care. It's immoral to use government to set quality standards higher than would exist in a truly "free market" (eliminating a wide swath of willing buyers and sellers of lessor-quality products and services), and then tell those who can't afford the resulting artificial "market" that it can't be socialized further because "government is broken."
That's just self-serving. We either need to deregulate healthcare (and medicine) so there is more choices among less-qualified products and services. Or, we need to subsidize the artificially-created high-quality market for those who are denied access to lower-quality products and services.
There's no way we can continue to use government to create a more predictable market (for those who can afford it), while telling those who are denied the choices which would exist in a truly free market that they shouldn't expect government help because that would violate "free market principles" (or cause my own care to suffer).
Mark | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals Do any of you even remember the downfall of healthcare started when Tricky Dick got together with Kaiser Permanente and decided to screw us.
Watch from 35 seconds on: »www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QkgUkM0···=related
Government is so bloated and inefficient because of the last several years. Government-mandated healthcare works in Europe, Canada, and France, so it can work here too. Close-mindedness is what got us into this problem in the first place. "Oh, it's too broken, just ignore it and it'll go away." 
So, applying your logic, we should just do nothing about the broadband problem in this country - contrary to EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY who is ahead of us having a national broadband plan with mandates and subsidies provided by the government - and just let things roll along as they are?
See No Evil/Hear No Evil/Speak No Evil?
GREAT idea, where do I sign up? | |
| | | | | | | | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP
2 edits | Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals The gov't was bloated and broken long before 2000. It's been bloated and broken since the 1930's.
I would agree, we should do nothing about "the broadband problem" because there is no "problem". The VAST majority of Americans have access to broadband. Just because they don't want it doesn't mean there is a problem. Meanwhile, it's not a problem for Joe Taxpayer to solve, when people choose to live where they do. Everyone makes choices, proximity to schools and work, crime, etc when they buy or rent. If broadband, which was virtually nonexistent a decade ago is that important, they should have considered it when they moved to where they are. Otherwise it's like moving next to the airport then bitching about the noise.
And even if there was a problem, you don't solve it by putting your worst problem solver on the case. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by Dogfather :Sorry, I don't care how much our excellent heathcare system is broken (I personally don't think it is). Again, that's convenient -- as you benefit from a market which wouldn't exist in a truly libertarian world of free (Darwinian) markets.
If government doesn't work, why don't you support deregulating health care so that there would be more choices (and more price pressure)? Because the current system works for you?
Mark | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP
4 edits | Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals I'm sorry, I thought I mentioned I don't think the heath care system is broken. Why would I support total deregulation of it? If you totally deregulate it I think it would be broken. If you totally regulate it, I think it would be broken. As it stands now I don't think it's "broken". There are some who aren't insured and some of those are uninsured by choice or because their priorities are all screwed up and claim they can't afford insurance when they really could.
So to gain perfection, we need to find a way to insure this small fraction who REALLY want insurance but REALLY can't afford it. I don't think that requires a gov't takeover. It simply requires some small changes to make insurance more affordable through lower taxes for insurers, tax credits for lower income people (strict means testing) to buy insurance, tort reform, non-profit insurance co-ops (like a credit union is to banks) etc. I don't think it takes a revolution, just some tweaking. But the insurer lobby is so strong that it won't happen because gov't is so corrupt and on the take. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by Dogfather :I'm sorry, I thought I mentioned I don't think the heath care system is broken. Why would I support total deregulation of it? You said government is broken. But, you don't think the government-created healthcare system is broken. Which is 1) a contradiction. And, 2) possibly due to the fact that you can afford this socially-created market.
Those who couldn't afford this socially-created market say the system isn't working as well as a free (non-socialized) market would. And, for them, it's broken.
That's the nature of ox-goring as people vie for government to work for them -- but claim it's broken when it works for someone else.
Mark | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by Dogfather :You are misunderstanding me. The gov't is broken. They can't accomplish anything themselves without F-ing it up. They can lay down limited regulation for others to do it without F-ing it up too bad. That's only because the regulation works for *you*.
For those who can't afford the artificial "market" created by *heavy* government regulation of healthcare, they'd say the government F'ed up the regulation.
This is what ox-goring is all about. Government is broken when it doesn't serve *me*. But, everyone else who wants government to serve their interests, well they're looking for a "handout."
Mark | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals You are assuming that the absence of regulation means everyone could afford it. That is a false assumption. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
See 25 replies to this post | |
| | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Good. Then as I established last post. Don't take Medications. 57 Million Tax Payer Dollars Socialized their research. Don't visit a Public Hospital. It receives Tax Payer money (Socialized) and cannot turn away patients for basic care. Don't drive on Roads. They receive tax payer dollars (Socialize) which the government doles out as it sees fits. Pay for your education par for par. Don't expect cities, state, federal assistance on school funding. 600 students / 30 teachers / 6 million budget. Each parent needs to pay 10,000 Dollars a year for their kid to attend Public School. No one else should socialize their education. best yet, need EMS, Police, etc. Don't use them. The general theme?
The minute YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY ONE paying a service, it becomes socialized. Your money, my money, and everyone elses goes into a collective pot. Our money is then handed over to the government to use as it seems fit. Public property is just another word for socialized property. We all collectively paid for it and "own it".
P.S. I hope you don't draw Social Security or Medicare. After all, your high strung stance on social programs should lead me to believe, you are said no, seeing how you are retired... Right? | |
| | | | | | |
See 33 replies to this post | |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Hey Tk, when someone uses the word "also," that generally means that something is IN ADDITION to the other things.
Obama said he has five components to his plan, but in addition to those five components, he'll make broadband more accessible to school children and hospitals.
The subject of your topic is extremely misleading and flat out wrong. | |
| | |
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by Matt :Hey Tk, when someone uses the word "also," that generally means that something is IN ADDITION to the other things. Obama said he has five components to his plan, but in addition to those five components, he'll make broadband more accessible to school children and hospitals. The subject of your topic is extremely misleading and flat out wrong. The other 4 components of his plan have nothing to do with broadband. Only the part I selected was his broadband proposal. So, if you actually had read the link, you would have seen that.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
| | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by TKJunkMail :said by Matt :Hey Tk, when someone uses the word "also," that generally means that something is IN ADDITION to the other things. Obama said he has five components to his plan, but in addition to those five components, he'll make broadband more accessible to school children and hospitals. The subject of your topic is extremely misleading and flat out wrong. The other 4 components of his plan have nothing to do with broadband. Only the part I selected was his broadband proposal. So, if you actually had read the link, you would have seen that. Here are the five components: (Taken from: »www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/t···logy.pdf)
• Redefine “broadband:” The Federal Communications Commission today defines “broadband” as an
astonishingly low 200 kbps. This distorts federal policy and hamstrings efforts to broaden
broadband access. Obama will define “broadband” for purposes of national policy at speeds
demanded by 21st century business and communications.
• Universal Service Reform: Obama will establish a multi-year plan with a date certain to change the
Universal Service Fund program from one that supports voice communications to one that supports
affordable broadband, with a specific focus on reaching previously un-served communities.
• Unleashing the Wireless Spectrum: Obama will confront the entrenched Washington interests that
have kept our public airwaves from being maximized for the public’s interest. Obama will demand a
review of existing uses of our wireless spectrum. He will create incentives for smarter, more
efficient and more imaginative use of government spectrum and new standards for commercial
spectrum to bring affordable broadband to rural communities that previously lacked it. He will
ensure that we have enough spectrum for police, ambulances and other public safety purposes.
• Bringing Broadband to our Schools, Libraries, Households and Hospitals: Obama will recommit
America to ensuring that our schools, libraries, households and hospitals have access to next
generation broadband networks. He will also make sure that there are adequate training and other
supplementary resources to allow every school, library and hospital to take full advantage of the
broadband connectivity.
• Encourage Public/Private Partnerships: Obama will encourage innovation at the local level through
federal support of public/private partnerships that deliver real broadband to communities that
currently lack it. | |
| | | | |
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ | Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals None of which he put in his radio address yesterday - except the schools & hospitals. Maybe he is backing down from his earlier promises? | |
| | | | | |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by TKJunkMail :None of which he put in his radio address yesterday - except the schools & hospitals. Maybe he is backing down from his earlier promises? Or perhaps he just didn't mention everything? After all, it's all there on his website for those who want to read it and he's mentioned it multiple times in other broadcasts. | |
| | | | | | | | | 
tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
·Comcast
| said by TKJunkMail :The promises sound great. But most schools, libraries and hospitals already are broadband connected based on the 100s of millions the USF funneled to states and ISPs. Spending tax dollars there is mostly redundant and will have little effect on moving the US from 15th place. Well, almost. The school district across the street from me has had fiber to the schools for 15 years, provided by Verizon, However the ongoing service and maintaince charges reached the point that the district is now reruning installing their own system, using a seperate conduit on the power company poles. While it seems very inefficient to run an entirely new system, the ongoing cost savings, greater control are expected to pay it off in less than 5 years (because it is a replacement of an USF system it is not funded by USF/erate)
Having a policy/setting a goal is the first step.
Perhaps the policy should force carriers to build out, and only pay reinbursement for costs in excess of return/ where the carrier can demonstrate annually that the take rate is below a normal commerial viable point.
That way tax dollars only pay for otherwise unprofitable areas, after the fact, and large amounts aren't fronted to the carriers before service is provided. | |
| | 
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| said by TKJunkMail :...most schools, libraries ... already are broadband connected...Spending tax dollars there is mostly redundant and will have little effect on moving the US from 15th place. True, but let's not confuse the goal with the indicator, nor forget that there are real people in these situations.
I listened to a young L.A. girl named Lily this weekend. She doesn't have broadband, it's available (so the 15th place wouldn't apply), but too expensive. 10% of families earning less than $30,000 do not have broadband. 60% of families earning more than $100,000 do.
She can't go to the library because its Internet-access stations are always packed full. She also can't go after dark as the neighborhood is pretty dangerous.
Lily is impressively bright -- she's probably college material. Can you imagine trying to compete for scholarships without Internet access?
She said that few of her friends could afford it -- she knew one neighborhood family that had it from her circle of friends.
This isn't rural America, this is mid-town and south-central Los Angeles.
Spending some tax dollars to get more library stations (or school, or Boys and Girls Club, or whatever -- with supervision) won't move us from 15th, but it will help Lily and her friends do her homework in a safe, supervised place. Competition is sorely needed and would help here, too.
Tax dollars aside, in the race for 6-7-10-50 Mbps, we need to ask service providers to help some folks out at 1 Mbps in the area of $15/mo..
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
| | | | | | | 
furlonium
Computer Over? Virus equals Very Yes?
join:2002-05-08
Bethlehem, PA
| Re: Obama limits broadband $ to schools, libraries, hospitals said by fatness :said by funchords :10% of families earning less than $30,000 do not have broadband. 60% of families earning more than $100,000 do. Not to take anything away from the point you're making, but that does not look right. If 10% of families earning less than $30,000 took their families out to eat one less time per month, that number would change drastically.
If that same 10% of families earning less than $30,000 didn't allow their son/daughter unlimited texting on their cell phones, more would have broadband.
Give me a break.
--
»www.myspace.com/intranet
I once had a dream that Sean Connery stayed at my apt., and he had his laptop with Win98 on it, and he knew how to connect to my wireless network. I don't do drugs  | |
| | | | 8744675
join:2000-10-10
Decatur, GA
| Yeah they're connected, but to a 16th century copper network full of splices, open switch boxes and hacks of all kinds. We need a full fiber network that can move some serious data, like MRI and CAT scan images between medical facilities. (Have you ever waited to pick up x-rays at a hospital to take to a doctor?)
And where there's a school or hospital, there's a neighborhood, which brings fiber that much closer to the people. | |
| |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Not only that, but even the DOCTORS think the system is broken and needs to be reformed. Don't believe me?
»runningdoctor.runnersworld.com/2···ors.html
That was posted in November by a doctor who outlines exactly why most doctors are leaving general practice and going into specialties and why some, like him, refuse to even accept insurance. | |
| | |
See 8 replies to this post | |
| | 
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Protecting new users said by mrchris :Especially Windows users on broadband, a router should be MANDATORY atop anti-spyware software so we have less zombies and spam factories. Mandated by who, the government?
Once that is in place, what else will that router be mandated to do?
NV
--
I support Little League RollerBall. | |
| 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD |  Repeat the Mistakes of The Past
The only thing the old New Deal did was extend the recession of the late 1920s into the Great Depression.
--
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty | |
| |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
2 edits | Re: Repeat the Mistakes of The Past said by pnh102 :Another "New Deal?" The only thing the old New Deal did was extend the recession of the late 1920s into the Great Depression. That's convenient when you don't know how things would have gone without the "Moderating Hand" of society (instead of the "Invisible Hand" of market economics).
You don't know that the 1929 "recession" wouldn't have been a depression anyway. Or, how much worse things would have been, albeit for a shorter period of time (as excesses were worked off).
It's easy to say the Depression may have only lasted 2-3 years, while ignoring that an additional million people may have starved to death. I'm sure there are people who believe in "Socio-economic Darwinism," but they are among the irrelevant fringe.
Why do I say that? Because those same enthusiasts of Darwinism personally benefit from regulated stock markets, banking system, food and drug quality laws, building codes and zoning laws. All social moderations to eliminate volatility in our individual daily lives. Social moderations to otherwise Darwinistic "Invisible Hand" economics.
We don't hear those enthusiasts complaining about that. Why? Because they personally benefit. They're playing the same ox-goring game as everyone else. The difference is, everyone else doesn't feel the need to dress up their ox-goring like it's something more principled.
Mark | |
| | Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL | The Great Depression had already hit it's peak by the time Roosevelt took office in 1933. The New Deal did not cause the Great Depression. | |
| | | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
1 edit | Re: Figures said by La Luna :We should be spending money on creating new jobs and getting those people who can't afford broadband to work so they can afford to pay for it themselves, I believe the premise is that availability of broadband will make it easier for people to get jobs, better jobs, etc. Greater opportunity for online training, telecommuting, etc.
I can agree if the money goes to municipalities to create their own FTTH infrastructure, promoting more choice and competition for service providers who want to serve individual homes. But, I'm afraid it will just turn into another no-strings-attached payout to the big providers.
Mark | |
| |
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by La Luna :We should be spending money on creating new jobs and getting those people who can't afford broadband to work so they can afford to pay for it themselves, in their own homes. This is NOT the same as helping out the car industry so millions of people will not LOSE the jobs they have. Most schools already have broadband for kids to use anyway. More handouts to the public = bad. And who exactly do you think is going to build all this infrastructure? This will create jobs. | |
| | kcir
join:2005-07-30
Butner, NC
| Do really think that the money is going to the big three will save the grunt's on the line jobs? Think again! All it's saving is the upper management/executive jobs as the money will be used to restructure and move more manufacturing overseas.
Yeah the grunts will still be unemployed and the little money they can make will have to pay taxes for the money lent so their jobs could be taken away!
»news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7428952.stm | |
| | | 
SHABAZZ
join:2008-07-13
Seattle, WA | Re: Figures The way the government is structuring the loans any overseas job shipment will put them the auto industry in default. As long as the House of Representatives doesn’t water it down we should see that happen. | |
| | decifal
join:2007-03-10
Bon Aqua, TN
| said by La Luna :We should be spending money on creating new jobs and getting those people who can't afford broadband to work so they can afford to pay for it themselves, in their own homes. This is NOT the same as helping out the car industry so millions of people will not LOSE the jobs they have. Most schools already have broadband for kids to use anyway. More handouts to the public = bad. Ever occur to you that alotta people don't have any form of broadband option sides from maybe a T1 line at a minimum of 350 a month? Probably not. More broadband options for those that have some already helps lower prices.. And just finally getting some form of realistic options for those that don't will in fact help the economy in many many ways.. If you cannot see this, then you lack vision. And for that.. I am sorry | |
| rdmiller
join:2005-09-23
Richmond, VA
| Need more information We need more information about "Most schools already have broadband for kids to use anyway."
This is obviously true for schools and libraries in metropolitan areas, where franchise agreements mandated it. But what about underserved rural areas? Was USF ever actually used for this? | |
| |
tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
·Comcast
| Re: Need more information said by rdmiller :We need more information about "Most schools already have broadband for kids to use anyway." This is obviously true for schools and libraries in metropolitan areas, where franchise agreements mandated it. But what about underserved rural areas? Was USF ever actually used for this?
yes......The problem being the control and collection of the funds left in the hands of the Telco's meant that (in large part, other than schools and libraries) the telco's used the fund to build out where they wanted, piecemeal, without intent of universal coverage. even if Erate covered a buildout, many small school and library districts could not afford the ongoing service and maintaince costs, and either refused service or shutoff service after the grant expired. | |
|
outcomesaplan
@optonline.net
| out comes a plan... stating a policy goal is nothing if poorly planned & implemented is not a policy goal at all: we'll take bush 2000-2008 as a most recent memorable case. putting the money to "work" in the right places means identifying the problem: specific groups of people don't have access. planning a solution: what methods of access would be most cost effective and useful? wireline, wireless, satellite? that all depends on the location and needs of those people. next, implementation.. throwing money at a problem doesn't work... suitcases of money into Iraq only made things worse.. put the money to "work" ensuring accountability of every penny spent and have it's use transparent to the American People.
There is no dobut that some of the money will go to incumbent telco & cable carriers; BUT.. with strings attached.. for example.. in some communities, internet access may mean a community job bank with internet databases.. access may mean providing or subsidizing devices such as "netbooks", low cost laptops or portable tablet / handhelds. Though, it would be strictly for the poor and low income need basis. It may also be a infrastructure project laying fiber from major cities to less dense populations. obviously, qwest territory doesn't have loads of capacity.. some funds may be targeted to the downtrodden and forgotten telco... with that being said... the four corners of the USA have a capacity issue; Northwest, Southwest, Rural Southeast, and Extreme Northeast (MA, NH, VT, ME). Let's not forget about Hawaii.
I do not want to see a repeat of what's happened in other failing or floundering industries... banking, auto, healthcare, defense. | |
|
billMAC
@comcast.net
| Sheesh, education sure isn't what it used to be. Gubbermint make work jobs have the same ending, the unemployment line. History is your friend, look up failed socialist FDR and the WPA for details. Unemployment went up under the FDR new deal, and that was after he raised taxes to confiscatory levels. It was WWII that ended the depression that socialist FDR created.
So how long was the wait for this idiocy? That's it? The new economic plan, grab a shovel and work for the gubbermint. You got to be kidding me. I bet this took all the brain power the one had, in one fart. I hear Hugo Chavez is intently studying Obama's brilliant stroke in bringing back the failures of FDR.
BTW, the Internet was built out long ago, the amount of dark fiber is staggering. It's the last mile that is constrained, mostly by the no-compete taxing organs known as local government. | |
| | hacker90
join:2005-09-01
Winnebago, IL
·Mediacom
| Re: Sheesh, education sure isn't what it used to be. Unemployment rose under the new deal? What are you smoking sonny? According to Wiki and several other sites from 1933 to 1941, unemployment rates dropped. Of course, there was the recession in 37 that rose the unemployment rate up for a year or two.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal#D···atistics | |
| 
Titus Pullo
I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26 | You need Broadband to download the 'promise of hope' promises spreadsheet this guy is compiling ...
... that is equaled only by the one needed to keep track of the debt trying to get out of this mess will generate
-- | |
| Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
| Redefining Braodband Since the definitions of "Broadband" seem to stick around for quite a while, I think they need be forward looking when setting a new definition. Currently I would not define anything less than 5/512 as "Broadband". A definition of say 15/5 would have some legs and would stimulate the ISPs to bring their equipment up to international standards. In todays world is even 5/512 really "High Speed"? | |
| | beaups
join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH | Re: Redefining Braodband In todays world is even 5/512 really "High Speed"?
yes, it is. | |
| | | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
| Re: Redefining Braodband So you would put it in the same class as the 20/20 available in most metro markets(expensive I know)? I would say no, it is not. Sure five years ago 5/512 was high speed, but not today. Just think back to when cars were a new thing, 40mph was fast. Is that fast today? | |
| | | 
XBL2009
------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| said by beaups :In todays world is even 5/512 really "High Speed"? yes, it is. No it sucks....we should all have access to low cost 100/100 by now but the cable/telco monopoly has got America by the balls. | |
| 
Duramax08
Oh rly?
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX | Look at it on the bright side, Atleast he gots a broadband plan that might help me get broadband 1700 feet where the DSL signal ends. Its about time someone tries to get us on the top of the broadband chart.
--
OM NOM NOM | |
| | k1ll3rdr4g0n
join:2005-03-19
Homer Glen, IL
1 edit | Re: Look at it on the bright side, said by Duramax08 :Atleast he gots a broadband plan that might help me get broadband 1700 feet where the DSL signal ends. Its about time someone tries to get us on the top of the broadband chart. Edit: Darn quick reply!
Anyways...it all depends on WHERE the money will be going. If its going directly to the ISP's pockets, lets just throw our hands up now and bend over because be prepared for more BS from the ISPs how they can't afford to increase their network capacity and have to raise rates. I swear, I really think some people are too greedy, and when you get to that point I think it should be federal law that you be taken out back and shot; because you are too stupid to see past your own greed. There are people losing their homes, but yet the ISP's CEOs want to sit there with their 7 figure salary and say with a straight face "We need more money.".
Uncle Sam, we need help from the evil ISPs!
*Uncle Sam slaps the hand of comcast and tells them not to do evil things again*
Wait, what!? | |
| | |
Duramax08
Oh rly?
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX
·Clearwire Wireless
·Juno Express
| Re: Look at it on the bright side, I dont think they should just give the money away to ISP's and say "here, go put up internets". They should have some kind of plan or quota they would have to meet by a certain deadline to receive money from the government. I know for sure that the government hires these electrical workers at my work to work on electrical stuff, I think they can contract people out to make broadband more available like how time warner contracts people out to put up the time warner cable lines.
Just going to have to wait and see what happens..... | |
| Drake34
join:2005-09-24
Niceville, FL | Hmm It all sounds good but where are those billions coming from? Everyone's pocket. | |
|
Static
@sbcglobal.net
| Tax breaks I know this may sound stupid and I'm just throwing this out there as a thought.What if the federal government gave the telcoms a tax break for meeting certain goals. Think venture capital type model here.
I'm very much for free market, so I'm still torn from making anything mandatory. Id rather the market and competition dictate where we go, but I don't think Id be against the government offering incentives to getting there faster. | |
| |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
2 edits | Re: Tax breaks said by Static :
I'm very much for free market, so I'm still torn from making anything mandatory.
In that case, use the business's status as a "corporation" to spur socially-desired behaviors. For those who are sensitive to violating "free market" principles, the "corporation" is a social creation. A fictional yet legal "person" to serve as the fall guy if officers and investors (co-owners) make the wrong choices in the conduct of business. An entity that wouldn't exist in purely "free market," limiting which wouldn't be in a purely "free market." Created by the state legislatures of this country.
Without the social device of a "corporate entity" there would be no feasible way for a business to trade stock publicly because investors would truly be co-owners and individually liable for the actions of the business (and its agents). There would be no socially-created "fall guy" to shield officers and investors from debts and other causes of action.
So, this social invention is a *huge* incentive. A huge giveaway by society. Yet society sells corporate entities for $500 and a few token requirements (board of directors, regular meetings, keeping minutes of meetings).
It wouldn't violate any free market principle to tie greater social imperatives to the doling out of these corporate charters. Limits on executive pay. Requirements that employees be represented on the socially-mandated board of directors. In the case of telcoms, that they attain certain penetration levels or "last mile" speeds.
It wouldn't be coercive because the entrepreneurs could always choose to keep their business private and incur all the risks that go with operating a private business in a truly free market. Nobody's holding a gun to their heads, forcing them to purchase corporate entities all day long.
That's why, IMO, an obsession with "free market" principles is misplaced. But, whatever helps you rationalize it is fine with me.
Mark | |
| | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | You mean like what has been done numerous times with little to no effect?
Hmmm... think Philly, Verizon and $2 billion in tax breaks that amounted to Verizon doing nothing for them. | |
| |
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| said by Static :
I know this may sound stupid and I'm just throwing this out there as a thought.What if the federal government gave the telcoms a tax break for meeting certain goals. Been there, done that. The telecom's will take the money and then get the laws changed or goalposts moved such that they have to do nothing at all and still get the breaks.
Frankly, I see in my crystal ball an obnoxious "modem tax" coming where those of us who already have DSL or Cable modems will pay a tax to support those who do not. Personally I would prefer supporting a public facility such as a library where those who do not have broadband can go. At least the rest of us who are paying the tab can use it to. | |
| mcz101
join:2005-03-25
Missouri City, TX
| I support the idea some people just like to complain on what things are getting done. lets just wait and see what happens. its only like one more month until we see some action.
for those who said schools already have broadband, you must dont understand the struggles that are faced. yes, most schools in the country have broadband, but exactly what speed? well i can tell you that the school i went to was sharing a 3MB connection from Verizon. Verizon is the only provider locked in our city and they aren't developing anything around here, not even FIOS. For a whole school to share 3MB, we had the internet down every other day and sometimes important work couldn't get done. Eventually, the school switched to Windstream but I doubt it's that fast.
Obama is just providing the opportunity for ordinary people to get the broadband internet that most people complain that they can't receive. Or like me, the highest speed available. I dread finding out after 7 years that Earthlink DSL was available in the area with 6MB provision, and only able to reach 4.3MB.
As technology advances, we need to keep up. The vision I wish for Obama to implement is just for straight fiber to every house, business, and school in the U.S. No, it wont be that easy to take into action. But, we have to start somewhere and forcing the ISP companies to get off their butts and do something is a step in the right direction. | |
| 
PeteC2
Got Mouse?
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-20
Bristol, CT
clubs:
·AT&T Yahoo
| What a bunch of HOKUM! No thanks!!! So much wrong with this:
"It is unacceptable that the United States ranks 15th in the world in broadband adoption," Mr. Obama said. "Here, in the country that invented the Internet, every child should have the chance to get online."
Were to begin?
First, who the bloody hell cares that the U.S. is "15th" in the world in broadband adoption? It is absolutely unimportant.
I guess, if you live on one of the coasts, and travel little, you might not notice, that this is one very, very expansive country, with huge areas that are not so easily covered. Even so, pretty much every school and public library in my state (of course, I am in a well-connected region) has broadband...not many little tykes in my area, regardless of family income, are without broadband access at some level.
Secondly, broadband access is not, as far as I know, a constitutionally promised "right"...in fact, broadband service, correct me if I am wrong, is a business...please oh please do I not only have to pay for broadband service, but also now through my taxes provide other folks with broadband? (BTW, yes, I know, I already do that thanks to a previous administration!).
I did not mean to start this as another anti-govt diatribe...but, we can not spend our way out of a recession/depression using endless tax dollars on an ever-expanding array of govt. forays into private enterprise!
As broadband and internet services grew together, the relevancy for such services also grew. That is how the free market system works. Demand always creates supply, just let it run it's course.
Besides, if the Federal Government funds this growth in broadband, just what would make you suspect that they then would not feel they had the holy calling to control it? That is, after all, the history of such things, yes?
So, we pay more tax money, and at the same time, give the legislators an excuse to leverage more control...thanks, but no thanks!
--
...something is happening here but you don't know what it is...do you, Mr. Jones? | |
| |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
1 edit | Re: What a bunch of HOKUM! No thanks!!! said by PeteC2 :broadband access is not, as far as I know, a constitutionally promised "right"... Not a "right" per se. But the government has powers beyond protecting our rights:
- Preamble to the US Constitution: "promote the general Welfare."
- Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 (Commerce Clause): Congress can regulate and enhance commerce among the several states. I.e., if the national interstate system was valid, so can national broadband.
Mark | |
| |
Duramax08
Oh rly?
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX | lets say you didnt have access to DSl, What would you say then? | |
| | 
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
 ·Hollis Hosting
·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
| said by PeteC2 : First, who the bloody hell cares that the U.S. is "15th" in the world in broadband adoption? It is absolutely unimportant. Agree - bragging rights are nice but at the end of the day it does not really matter.
said by PeteC2 : Secondly, broadband access is not, as far as I know, a constitutionally promised "right"... No one I'm aware of is arguing broadband is a right. The discussion is over whether or not it is mature enough to think of it as a public utility like: water, sewer, telephone, electricity etc and manage it as such. Will investments in broadband increase the common good and result in growing the economy.
said by PeteC2 : we can not spend our way out of a recession/depression using endless tax dollars on an ever-expanding array of govt. forays into private enterprise! I agree there is danger here there is also danger in not acting. The trick is to find optimum balance.
said by PeteC2 :As broadband and internet services grew together, the relevancy for such services also grew. That is how the free market system works. Demand always creates supply, just let it run it's course. I think you overlook the value of regulation on helping markets grow and what happens once they mature. I'd argue US Telecom regulations that forced phone companies to allow third party connection to their network (in this case ISPs) that used it in a way they did not want and requiring unmetered local calling had a tremendous effect on early Internet experimentation. I'd argue demand would not have grown as rapidly as it did if the phone companies had prevailed.
said by PeteC2 : Besides, if the Federal Government funds this growth in broadband, just what would make you suspect that they then would not feel they had the holy calling to control it? Seems to me tendency for government to snoop on its citizens and protect then from real and imaged threats is independent of whether or not they control the communication resource. We need to stay vigilant regardless and support efforts by the ACLU, EFF and muckraking media to protect our rights from government intrusion.
/tom | |
| 
Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium
join:2002-12-05
Mullica Hill, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Stimulate the economy? I can not recall a single occurance in U.S. history where government spending on infrastructure has shown signs of positively impacting a down economy. the idea of creating jobs out of this to advance the broadband connectivity of America holds no weight and is actually proven wrong, or in a best case, irrelevant, when one looks at all previous attempts.
an economy can not be spurred by spending government money on infrastructure. if the markets for these less densely populated areas warranted better infrastructure, you can bet current or new broadband suppliers would be upgrading or working out the numbers right now. as it stands, and if you ask any of the ISPs doing business in lower density areas, it's not financially feasible to spend $x on infrastructure to create $y in additional revenue if x is greater than y.
--
Somnambulator - t3h 5133pw41k3r
The Stolen Eye TF2 Server
~Choosy moms choose Jif~ | |
| |
Duramax08
Oh rly?
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX | Re: Stimulate the economy? How about those Eisenhower highways like highway 10 going coast to coast? That was a infrastructure. | |
| | |
Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium
join:2002-12-05
Mullica Hill, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Stimulate the economy? said by Duramax08 :How about those Eisenhower highways like highway 10 going coast to coast? That was a infrastructure. right, and by itself it didnt have any impact on the economy | |
| | | |
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| Re: Stimulate the economy? said by Somnambul33t :said by Duramax08 :How about those Eisenhower highways like highway 10 going coast to coast? That was a infrastructure. right, and by itself it didnt have any impact on the economy Reference please.
Mark | |
| | | 
dumwaldo
Premium
join:2001-03-12 | I think it is great I think it is just great that the president elect want to get broadband to more people and at the same time two of the largest broadband ISP's in the country are testing way to keep people from using the broadband that they already have. | |
| 
BBT IV
Premium
join:2006-03-22
Central Point, OR | More handouts Wow, a chicken in every pot, free healtcare, easier qualification for welfare and now free internet. All praise king O'Bama! | |
| | | |
|
