 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | GOOD! The last thing the city of Philadelphia should be doing is wasting our money on something as silly as this. Maybe they should be putting that money towards funding SEPTA, fixing crappy schools, hiring more cops and not closing down fire stations instead.
If people want Internet access that bad, they can always buy it from Comcast or Verizon, its not like the city isn't wired for broadband already.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
|
|
| Which one do you work for, Verizon or Comcast? |
|
 QumahlinNever Enough TimePremium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state | Why is it people must assume that if you side with corporations that you must work for who you are siding for...I mean god forbid he has a point about the money being better spent elsewhere for REAL needs.
I'm all for having wi-fi throughout the city...but the fact is the city has PLENTY of problems that need fixing before moving out to frivilous endeavors such as this. |
|
| reply to staticx57
His point does not mean he works for "Big Tobacco" or something. I agree, governments should focus on things that are needed, like feeding the poor maybe?
The internet is not a "need". It is not a staple item like water. |
|
EAP
join:2000-01-15
Lafayette Hill, PA
1 edit | reply to pnh102
"our money" -- you live in King of Prussia.
By the way, I live in the suburbs too. But I realize that what is good for Philadelphia is good for the entire metropolitan area. I see no harm in this.
I don't think that the $$$ for this is coming from another budget area. SEPTA is funded by the state anyway.
Fire and police seem plentiful to me. I have never heard of any place in Philly burning down due to lack of fire stations. Nor have I seen not enough cops anywhere -- in fact I see plenty. Crime is down too.
You sound like the typical suburbanite who hasn't been too the big oh so scary city in 15 years and is too scared to go to a center city restaurant cause you might have to -- oh my god -- pay for parking. You think no money should ever be budgeted for Philly from anywhere else in the state (very provincial -- not thinking metropolitan). |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
1 edit | said by EAP:"our money" -- you live in King of Prussia. And a lot of the money I pay in state taxes ends up going into city coffers. If I worked in the city, I would also be forced to pay a wage tax. Either way, I have no say in how this money is spent.
said by EAP:But I realize that what is good for Philadelphia is good for the entire metropolitan area. You are correct, and with the city wasting money on silly, useless things, our taxes in the suburbs go up to make up the difference.
said by EAP:I don't think that the $$$ for this is coming from another budget area. SEPTA is funded by the state anyway. Every county serviced by SEPTA pays part of its costs. The remainder comes from fares, as well as state and federal funds.
said by EAP:Fire and police seem plentiful to me. I have never heard of any place in Philly burning down due to lack of fire stations. Nor have I seen not enough cops anywhere -- in fact I see plenty. Crime is down too. Philadelphia is about to close at least 8 fire stations to "save money." What if fewer fire stations mean more people dying in fires because the remaining stations cannot dispatch units quickly enough? As for crime being down, that is due to the fact that there are more cops on the streets. Instead of wasting money on something people can get on their own, perhaps more cops could be hired to make the city streets safer. And don't get me started on how pathetic the Philadelphia school system is.
And as for me being a typical suburbanite, I go into the city at least once a week for work related purposes and spend a fair amount of time in the city for fun. I want Philadelphia to be the best it can possibly be. But cutting spending on essential services to pay for some frivolous Internet venture is not the way to accomplish this.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
| reply to pnh102
Bravo Verizon!!!
I don't understand why the City of Philadelphia should operate what essentially would be a monopoly that canibalizes the service from legitimate companies providing broadband through DSL, cable, wireless (Wi-Fi) and MDS.
The City already provides FREE Wi-Fi at Love Park and at the Reading Terminal near downtown. Poor people cannot afford laptops so it does not make sense to deploy Wi-Fi in all areas of town. If the true intent is to gap the digital divide, the city should provide more computer terminals in libaries where the Internet will be used for people to study with instead of being used to arrange drug deals. But maybe the City needs the service for its Police Dept. so that it can more quickly access its databases to apprehend people for driving while black and the like... Do we really need to facilitate Big Brother??
If Wi-Fi throughout the city is really required, the City instead should offer an RFP to invite experienced Wi-Fi providers to deploy the mesh and be able to charge money for the access and perhaps offer the service to the city departments as well. In turn, the city could get a portion of the revenue for rental of light poles, signs and public building tops. (Instead of spending the City coffers, this would bring in revenue for other much needed projects.)
Why drain the life out of an already thin city budget? Just drain it out of the telecoms and let the users pay for the service as they need it. |
|
GLX
join:2000-01-18
San Francisco, CA
3 edits | reply to EAP
As a resident of Philadelphia (19129), I'd far prefer that the city spend money on
1) Plowing my street when it snows
I've never, ever had it plowed, even 2 years ago when we had those three big storms back to back. Forced me to buy a car that could drive in a foot of snow.
2) Fixing the streets
My coworker blew out a tire last week on a ditch in a street that was opened up by a city crew but never closed.
3) Fixing the schools
You see the news. 'nuff said.
4) Bailing SEPTA out again
To me this is incredibly low priority as they keep on digging their own grave, however it's still HIGHER in priority than Wi-Fi
5) Fixing PGW. Billions of dollars in debt. It's city owned.
6) Cut the absolutely ridiculous city wage tax that I pay.
Unless you work in the city you can't even begin to understand how hideous it is to have to pay ANOTHER 4% out of your paycheck to a city who can't even plow my street. Don't give me the "convenience" BS - I do most of my shopping in KoP and Plymouth Meeting and my work is in Bala Cynwyd. Of course I'm not going to shop in the city if it's going to cost me an extra 1% in sales tax. The last thing I want is to pay MORE to the city so that they can sponsor WiFi
7) Mayor $treet's impeachment trial 
As much as I feel it's BS that the state is giving them a handout by legislating something like this, I'd rather it happen and they force the city's hand rather than $treet giving the contract for installing it to his brother. |
|
| reply to Qumahlin
the part about working for Verizon was sarcasm. I think it is ridiculous that there should be a bill banning municipal broadband ventures in the state. you dont need a bill to ban money from being used for broadband so it would be used for other causes. |
|
 DerchPremium
join:2004-10-16
Cross Plains, WI | reply to pnh102
I think they are thinking about creating revenue to support public services in the long run. If they are not, than I agree with you.
As for Verizon and other supporting ISP's, your nuts... |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to staticx57
said by staticx57:Which one do you work for, Verizon or Comcast? I use Comcast HSI at home and Verizon DSL at work. I guess that makes me the worst of 2 evils
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to Starbucks Wi-Fi User
said by Starbucks Wi-Fi User:
But maybe the City needs the service for its Police Dept. so that it can more quickly access its databases to apprehend people for driving while black and the like... If the city were to use an unregulated and unguaranteed-to-be-available-when-you-need-it space of bandwidth for something as life-critical as police or other emergency services, then this is much worse than a waste of money, this is the city deliberately taking risks that will put peoples' lives in danger.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
 nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:If people want Internet access that bad, they can always buy it from Comcast or Verizon, its not like the city isn't wired for broadband already. While the particular article in question reguards how it effects the Philadelphia effort, not every (probably not even most) areas have 100% availability of broadband. If they must pass a law similar to this, it should be with the provision that Municipalities should be allowed to provide service where it doesn't already exist with more than one alternative provider. That is to say, municipalities should be able to provide for their citizenry wherever consumer choice and competitive markets do not already exist.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) |
|
| reply to pnh102
God forbid the local voters have a say in government that doesn't include the words "I'm kissing verizon's ass while they reach around and take my wallet" |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by netscape 6:God forbid the local voters have a say in government that doesn't include the words "I'm kissing verizon's ass while they reach around and take my wallet" If that's the case, then voters statewide should have say in the local elections in Philadelphia. At the very least, anyone who does not live in the city but still pays city wage tax should get that right.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
| said by pnh102: If that's the case, then voters statewide should have say in the local elections in Philadelphia. At the very least, anyone who does not live in the city but still pays city wage tax should get that right. See that's the problem. Government isn't governed by the tax payers. It's governed by it's citizens. If nonresidents don't like it there they can look for work elsewhere or move there for a say. |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by netscape 6:If nonresidents don't like it there they can look for work elsewhere or move there for a say. The people who are paying the bills shouldn't be burdened paying for something that the city does not need and that the city cannot possibly afford. In light of the fiscal crisis that the city currently is in, there is no logical reason whatsoever for more frivolous spending to take place.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to GLX
said by GLX:1) Plowing my street when it snows I've never, ever had it plowed, even 2 years ago when we had those three big storms back to back. Forced me to buy a car that could drive in a foot of snow. Not even during an election year?
said by GLX:As much as I feel it's BS that the state is giving them a handout by legislating something like this, I'd rather it happen and they force the city's hand rather than $treet giving the contract for installing it to his brother. If you start seeing open wireless access points that are named "NOTLIM," you better watch out!
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
| reply to pnh102
Wasting money? Think of how many public buildings or government offices are currently being supplied with internet access and how much is being paid for all of those feeds. I imagine the cost of a wifi net with 3 or 4 major backend feed points would cost much less then funding access at each serperate site. |
|
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102: said by netscape 6:If nonresidents don't like it there they can look for work elsewhere or move there for a say. The people who are paying the bills shouldn't be burdened paying for something that the city does not need and that the city cannot possibly afford. In light of the fiscal crisis that the city currently is in, there is no logical reason whatsoever for more frivolous spending to take place. The people of philly should be the ones to decide what the city can and can not afford. Not the state. |
|
