republican-creole
site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


Steve
I know your IP address
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5

reply to B

Re: Idiots

said by B:

Undeserving twits.
Not everybody who opposed this is an "idiot": many oppose government competition with private industry, and I would have voted against it in my town even though I am neither "connected with the telcos" nor "an idiot". The government rarely does a better job than private industry, but in any case many oppose this on principle. That doesn't make somebody "a twit".

Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site


id10Terror

@165.236.x.x

so maybe your company could do a better job? c'mon.


wiggles4

join:2004-10-09
Eugene, OR

1 edit

reply to Steve

said by B:
The government rarely does a better job than private industry...
Didn't the United States put a man on the moon over 40 years ago? Private industry will never do anything that won't assure them a profit, which leaves out a whole lot.

B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28

reply to Steve

But, Steve! There IS no direct competition for cable-style services! DSL is a joke -- the bandwidth's just not there.

This would have BEEN the competition that is supposed to make the market fairer and better.

The same "principle" of disliking government-run utilities (which I am not alien to) should be the same principle that abhors de facto monopolies.

If you ignore the realities, a cable and broadband monopoly that has complete control over what you pay for a service, in favor of a principle (that government "rarely" does better), I just don't think you're being reasonable.

-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function



Steve
I know your IP address
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5

said by B:

The same "principle" of disliking government-run utilities (which I am not alien to) should be the same principle that abhors de facto monopolies.
I'm not a fan of de facto monopolies either, but this is what happens with cities have exclusive franchise arrangements for years: this all militates towards less government involvement, not more.

Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site

B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28


Perhaps, but I really don't the government is standing between me and cheaper broadband! Rather, I think the ominous spectre of investing in infrastructure is what keeps any single-sourced wired competition at bay.

I'm viewing this quite practically -- in this case there is a viable proposed competitor in the marketplace, and it only happens to be sponsored via a public initiative. Their web page claims their current plan is ENTIRELY financed through private sector investment, with NO taxpayer dollars.

I just don't see objecting to this simply because the government is involved. I quite like having roads to drive on, sidewalks, a police force and military, and so on. And as you imply, the government was damn well involved in Comcast's ascendancy to this monopoly to begin with.

More to the point, government initiatives are involved in all KINDS of effort to foster private industry, successfully or not. "Economic incentive zones", sales tax wars, etc. If there's no reasonable prospect of a single private competitor starting from scratch, what's wrong with government jump-starting the project, for the benefit of citizens, in an effort to level a skewed playing field created by the "exclusive franchise arrangements" you bemoan?

-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function



wavguy2003
370's Forever
Premium
join:2004-03-18
Saint Charles, IL

reply to Steve
St. Charles and other municipalities in this area have quite a bit of experience in running their own utilities. They've been doing it for years. St. Charles runs it's own electric utility and our rates are better than Com Ed and the power is more reliable.

Just because it's a municipality doesn't mean they can't do it better.


electric_dsl

join:2004-07-20
Pickering, ON

reply to wiggles4
The only reason NASA did that is because they are a massive monopoly that operates at a loss to keep private business out of the space business.



lyls

@adsl.tele.dk

reply to Steve
americans always believe that private is good and government is evil... i think the truth lies somewhere in between


Urzumph

join:2002-11-06
Australia

reply to Steve
Tell that to telstra. It's gone down hill ever since it was privatized (and it's not even fully privatized yet)


B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28

reply to B

said by B:

If there's no reasonable prospect of a single private competitor starting from scratch, what's wrong with government jump-starting the project, for the benefit of citizens, in an effort to level a skewed playing field created by the "exclusive franchise arrangements" you bemoan?
Hello, Steve See Profile ? That wasn't a rhetorical question; I was wondering how you'd answer...

-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function

Sunday, 27-May 16:48:44 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics