| Tripping the Raising Awareness Alarm Yes here were go again by the leftwingerreports.com trying to raise awareness again.
First of all dump the Orwellian redefinition of terms. It is not luxury vs. utility It socialism vs capitalism. Utilities are often private companies and even so have the right to cut off non-paying customers this goes for electricity phones and all other utilities. I also find disingenuous to call it a rural vs. since many of the complainers are urban yuppies with broadband access.
What were have here is a myopic group of liberal activist who hate private enterprise and with to turn the internet to a welfare state. This wills in turn increase political power for the left by making more people dependant on the state.
There is a fallacy at play. The author hides behind rural Schools and Hospitals. Like most liberals they can only think of the now and today. Rural schools have survived very well without the internet for over a hundred years. Adding the Internet will not make things better. In fact it can make thing worst by gobbling up valuable resource that can be better use like attracting more doctors to rural areas. This also goes for the economic rational for socialized internet. Worst it would require a new tax which steals resources that can be better used. There is no proof bringing in socialized internet alone will bring economic growth to a community |
|
|  |
|
| reply to richardpor
I would respect such radical minority pro-industry views if you were honest with your argument, and simply said:
Human beings do not matter to me. Profit matters to me. All obstacles to profit are my enemy
I would respect that. But instead free-market fanatics have to try and dress greed (and make no mistake, greed is your position) up as this elaborate ethos, where you crap out gems like this: said by you :
Rural schools have survived very well without the internet for over a hundred years. Adding the Internet will not make things better.
|
|
Talis
join:2001-06-21
Houston, TX | reply to richardpor
Talk about myopic. Who said anything about turning broadband into welfare or left-wing socialism? The discussion is about broadband as a utility. Making something a utility doesn't make it free or turn it into welfare. Your own example of electricity and phone company monopolies - both public utilities - shows this.
said by richardpor:Worst it would require a new tax which steals resources that can be better used. Blather and scare tactics. Broadband as a utility does not REQUIRE new taxes for its existence. |
|
| said by Talis:Talk about myopic. Who said anything about turning broadband into welfare or left-wing socialism? The discussion is about broadband as a utility. Making something a utility doesn't make it free or turn it into welfare. Your own example of electricity and phone company monopolies - both public utilities - shows this. said by richardpor:Worst it would require a new tax which steals resources that can be better used. Blather and scare tactics. Broadband as a utility does not REQUIRE new taxes for its existence. Then do you agree with me the internet be left to private enterprise and not become another government provided program. |
|
| Absolutely! IF, and only if they play by the rules. After all, they ARE a monopoly. 95% of all towns have only ONE cable company and ONE telephone company. And most people do NOT have access to 2 choices for broadband.
We the citizens, give them an opportunity to serve us, not the other way around. In exhcange for them taking OUR money, we demand certain rights. Rights like Net Neutrality. Rights like Universal Coverage. Rights like Local Television Boards. It's those rights that counter the GREED which is so prevalent.
Yes, it's GREED, how else could you explain the telco's crying like 2 year olds, saying "waaah, waaah, we don't want to compete with muni's. While out the other side of their ass they are saying 'waaah waaah, it's too expensive to wire your town'".. What's it going to be? If they stop ANY muni's, then they MUST WIRE all towns. If they DON'T stop any muni's, then they drop all the stupid lawsuits, and compete if the citizens want muni broadband.
So, 'sure', private enterprises should run the internet. But first they need to grow up, which they show no signs of doing.
--
Sure the internet has lots of porn and piracy, but I'm sure there's a downside to it. |
|
noone1
join:2004-06-04
Nashua, NH | said by G_Poobah:Absolutely! IF, and only if they play by the rules. After all, they ARE a monopoly. ... Yes, it's GREED, how else could you explain the telco's crying like 2 year olds,...we demand certain rights. Rights like Net Neutrality. Rights like Universal Coverage. Rights like Local Television Boards. It's those rights that counter the GREED which is so prevalent. ... So, 'sure', private enterprises should run the internet. But first they need to grow up, which they show no signs of doing. Ok then, you continue to rile against these corporations then boycott them! Drop your cable and phone line in protest. Put your money where your mouth is.
There are other options (satellite) but wait, they cost more so they must be more greedy!
Pull a T1 into your house purchased from some non greedy company, oh wait, that will probably cost more also. They must be greedy also!
Now, yes, I am using extremes in my statements but it is to help show a point; you demand "rights" but those are really more bureaucracy, not rights. The only right you have is to drop them or accept their pricing.
This ALL being said, there is NOTHING wrong whit putting pressure on these companies. |
|
| reply to richardpor
OMG finally someone who has described the complainers with a precision that trancends nature. |
|
|
|
Cod
join:2000-07-05
Kernersville, NC Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
3 edits | reply to G_Poobah
said by G_Poobah:Absolutely! IF, and only if they play by the rules. After all, they ARE a monopoly. 95% of all towns have only ONE cable company and ONE telephone company. And most people do NOT have access to 2 choices for broadband. Didn't you just exactly quote 2 different choices of broadband which busts your definition of broadband as a monopoly? You state that 95% of all towns have 2 choices of broadband. Please tell me how 95% of towns having 2 choices is a monopoly.... Keep in mind the definition of 'monopoly':
In economics, a monopoly (from the Greek monos, one + polein, to sell) is defined as a persistent market situation where there is only one provider of a kind of product or service. Monopolies are characterized by a lack of economic competition for the good or service that they provide and a lack of viable substitute goods.
source: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly |
|
