| The GOP! Man, it's a damn good thing the GOP is looking out for the average American by keeping "big government" out of our lives.
It's a good thing they're looking out for state's rights too, otherwise, you'd end up with some hippy-tree-hugger liberal communist terrorist passing laws on the federal level that screw good honest republican loyalty-oath signing neoconservative fundamentalist christian zealots out of their god-given right to wait 20-30 years for wholesome, privately funded corporate monopoly broadband that offers a fraction of the bandwidth that these heathen foriegn countries give their citizens at several times the price most other countries charge.
Now, back to Robin Meade's CNN Headline News morning brainmelt.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by CrazyFingers:It's a good thing they're looking out for state's rights too, otherwise, you'd end up with some hippy-tree-hugger liberal communist terrorist passing laws on the federal level that screw good honest republican loyalty-oath signing neoconservative fundamentalist christian zealots out of their god-given right to wait 20-30 years for wholesome, privately funded corporate monopoly broadband that offers a fraction of the bandwidth that these heathen foriegn countries give their citizens at several times the price most other countries charge. If people out in rural areas think broadband is such a big deal, then why don't they pour their own money into creating a locally run broadband venture instead of trying to force other people to pay to solve their problems?
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
| If people in Washington DC think that American democracy is worthy of forcefully exporting across the globe, why are they so terrified of allowing individual cities to vote on their own issues? Why are they obsessed with placing more and more restrictions on them from a federal level? Why do they craft pieces of legislation like this that are strictly intended to remove our rights to decide for ourselves what we do or don't want at a local level?
Gosh, it almost seems like our elected "representatives" are more interested in representing the desires of their corporate masters than us little people.
But, that can't be...why, that'd be..un-American, wouldn't it?
And surely, you're not un-American, are you boy? You better show me your papers. No papers? You'll need to come with me then.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... |
|
 teachPremium
join:2000-09-21
Denver, CO | reply to pnh102
you are joking right? please say yes, please. lol |
|
|
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by teach:you are joking right? please say yes, please. lol So its such a joke to expect that people who want something so badly get up off their asses and work for it themselves than ask for the government to provide it for them?
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
| You know, you're right.
For example, if the Iraqi people wanted American style democracy so bad, they should have gotten off their asses and worked for it themselves.
And if the tsunami victims wanted food and medicine so badly, they should have gotten off their wet asses and worked for it themselves.
Oh, wait a sec, you'll probably want to argue that's not what you meant at all by "get up off their asses and work for it themselves". You'll probably want to limit this discussion to a domestic agenda.
Ok, fine. Then I expect I'll see you soon with a shovel patching the holes in your street yourself. Or, perhaps digging a well for drinking water yourself. Maybe even building a windmill to run your own private generator for electricity at your house? Hmm?
To which you'll of course respond with some drivel about "necessary utilities vs. luxuries".
Which will prompt a "welcome to the year 2005, internet connectivity is a defining aspect of our modern society, wake up and deal with that fact" response.
Because, you see, we've seen this argument here before.
But, all of this misses the crucial fact of this specific forum discussion.
This is not about whether municipal broadband is right or wrong.
This is about the federal government considering denying the local communities the right to democratically decide for themselves whether they want municipal broadband or not.
Now, if you'd like to discuss the actual matter at hand instead of clouding it with FUD from a different topic completely, please, go ahead.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:
If people out in rural areas think broadband is such a big deal, then why don't they pour their own money into creating a locally run broadband venture ...
Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that what a muni is all about?
said by pnh102:
...instead of trying to force other people to pay to solve their problems?
Isn't that the approach the muni opposition has taken? If private property owners are forced to accept easements, then who has paid to solve the problem of reaching subscribers in the last mile? |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
1 edit | reply to CrazyFingers
said by CrazyFingers:You know, you're right. For example, if the Iraqi people wanted American style democracy so bad, they should have gotten off their asses and worked for it themselves. And if the tsunami victims wanted food and medicine so badly, they should have gotten off their wet asses and worked for it themselves. You don't need to mouth off your anti-war bias in this argument, its just not needed here. You may not realize this but local broadband is much different from overthrowing a brutal dictator and it is also different from providing disaster relief.
said by CrazyFingers:Oh, wait a sec, you'll probably want to argue that's not what you meant at all by "get up off their asses and work for it themselves". You'll probably want to limit this discussion to a domestic agenda. Um... I wasn't the one to inject foreign issues into this debate, you were.
said by CrazyFingers:Ok, fine. Then I expect I'll see you soon with a shovel patching the holes in your street yourself. This point is irrelevant. In most jurisdictions in the USA, roads are paid for by gas taxes, tolls, car registration fees and other fees attached to the operation of motor vehicles. Its a safe bet to say that people who don't drive don't pay a nickel for road maintenance. Every municipal broadband operation, on the other hand, either uses tax money, bonds guaranteed by taxpayers, or skims money of some other municipally run service in order to operate.
said by CrazyFingers:Or, perhaps digging a well for drinking water yourself. Again, this point is irrelevant because people can and do dig their own wells and if they buy water from some public or private agency, most only pay for what they use and do not pay for other peoples' usage.
said by CrazyFingers:Maybe even building a windmill to run your own private generator for electricity at your house? Hmm? Huh? There are people who do this you know, and again, most people who don't only pay for the electricity they use.
said by CrazyFingers:To which you'll of course respond with some drivel about "necessary utilities vs. luxuries". Who died of broadband deprivation?
said by CrazyFingers:Which will prompt a "welcome to the year 2005, internet connectivity is a defining aspect of our modern society, wake up and deal with that fact" response. Not all parts of the USA have access to drinking water, sewer systems, landline phones and electricity or gas, of course, not many people live in these parts. Is it the government's job to ensure that anyone who chooses to live out in the middle of nowhere get access to these services?
said by CrazyFingers:Because, you see, we've seen this argument here before. But, all of this misses the crucial fact of this specific forum discussion. And again, you lose it.
said by CrazyFingers:This is not about whether municipal broadband is right or wrong. It is wrong.
said by CrazyFingers:This is about the federal government considering denying the local communities the right to democratically decide for themselves whether they want municipal broadband or not. It may be wrong for the Federal government to decide this issue, but it is not without precedent. Federal laws which govern the placement of cell phone towers always override local zoning codes. Federal environmental laws also restrict local development in many areas. Federal historical preservation laws also restrict such development in historically sensitive areas.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
b10010011Whats a Posting tag?
join:2004-09-07
Bellingham, WA Reviews:
 ·Comcast Formerl..
3 edits | reply to CrazyFingers
I think it is pretty clear that the GOP thinks big government should control every aspect of a persons life. From how they are concived, what the do their entire lives, what god they are allowed to pray to, to when and how they are allowed to die.
This is just one more example of how the government wants to take away your freedom to decide what you think is best for you. |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to lesopp
said by lesopp: said by pnh102:
If people out in rural areas think broadband is such a big deal, then why don't they pour their own money into creating a locally run broadband venture ...
Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that what a muni is all about? No, municipally run broadband is high-speed Internet service provided by your local government and paid for partially by user fees and subsidized by other sources of government revenue. The solution for which I am arguing instead is one in which interested parties invest their own money and run their own Internet service.
said by lesopp: said by pnh102:
...instead of trying to force other people to pay to solve their problems?
Isn't that the approach the muni opposition has taken? If private property owners are forced to accept easements, then who has paid to solve the problem of reaching subscribers in the last mile? Local governments can make it easier by granting such easements to private companies. One example is Verizon running into trouble deploying FIOS because stupid local governments won't grant them the easements they need.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
| reply to pnh102
I assume you have your own privately funded medical insurance to help defray the costs of the hideous affliction which renders you physically incapable of addressing the issue at hand.
You actually spent a lot of time and energy rebutting my sarcastic examples of non-issues people like you use to cloud the argument (rebuttals which, I might add, I included myself in my post to try to make it clear the absurdity of these very examples).
Wow.
I'll attempt to make this a bit clearer for you.
The federal government has no business interfering with a local municipality's right to allow their citizens to decide for themselves whether they want muni-broadband. If a small under-served or monopoly abused city or town wants to provide their citizens with municipal broadband, they should at least be allowed to vote on it. Democratically.
Like the Constitution provides.
Oh, that's right.
For right-wing neocons, the Constitution is this annoyingly archaic obstacle to corporate profits. What was I thinking?
Let's all welcome our corporate overlords.
And please, buy something on credit today, for the children.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to pnh102
pnh102, in some areas, they do!
It was about 2 or so years ago, there were comunitites in Colorado? I think it was that were going to wire their own small system for thier area and bring in one connection for all to share and resell?
Anyone recall this? I know it was in Denver, AZ, or abouts that part of the country..
This isn't the only story I heard of this.. people are doing private initiatives..
By the way.. what's wrong with the Muni's getting into it? We all bitch about the gov taxing us all the time and taking taking taking... I seriously don't see why we can't allow them to generate money in another way, in a competative way, to help offset taxes in a way rather than generating revenues by fines, fees, etc. We know that private industry can offer DSL for $14.99 a month, so why should we, the people, not be able to do the same?
G |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to pnh102
and by the way, in some of these small, out reaching areas, these people DO have to put their own roads in, or at least badn together as a community to pay for the construction of them.
In an area of MN called corcoran, just on the edge of the main city, many roads are still dirt yet they are "city streets"... why are they dirt? Becuase the city told the people to finish them yourself, or pay us to do it for you.
Just wanted to add this.. it's actually a good comparison.. outlying areas that want something that everyone else already has and takes for granted in the lost rehlm of taxation. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to b10010011
To also sum it up? The GOP wants to control lives by dictating and mandating that all live by what the GOP deems IS your GOD GIVEN RIGHTS... but don't get me started on teh religious debate. I simply brought this up to repond to GOP over stepping wiht these BS laws. |
|
