how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
141 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
1 edit | Not so sure After looking at the population of these counties, I`m not so sure this is such a great idea. Just the practicality of fibering these 2 counties that have a total population under 65,000 for an area of almost 800 square miles.
They would probably have to continue to subsidise the project to keep it going. What company is going to want to lease the lines in such a rural area? Do these people really want it and can they afford it.
I say ask the people what they would rather have: subsidised fiber optics or health care.
$400,000 is just the tip of the iceberg of the millions they want to spend.
The statement: "Rundgren said the justification for governmental investment in such a system is to help create an infrastructure to help businesses do business." makes it clear who this investment is targeted at.
Edit: incorrect math | |
| said by Light Guy: I say ask the people what they would rather have: subsidised fiber optics or health care. $400,000 divided by 65,000 people = over $6,000 per person. They may rather have health care. But your math is off. $400,000/65,000 = $6.15/person (NOT $6,000/person)
You don't get much healthcare for $6.15/person.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page | |
 mr seanProfessional InfidelPremium,ExMod 2001-07
join:2001-04-03
N. Absentia
kudos:1
 ·Clearwire
| That had to hurt TK, knowing that you don't always feel warm and fuzzy about municipal broadband.
So in the interest of fair play:
The article states that $400,000 is just part of the funding. The Co-op hopes to raise a total of $2,626,000 for 36 miles of a proposed 283 mile network.
So that 36 miles would cost $40.40 per resident in the two counties. Sticking with the health-care comparison, that's less than my co-pay when I visit the ER.
--
How you can make the world a Better Place | |
 batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by mr sean:That had to hurt TK, knowing that you don't always feel warm and fuzzy about municipal broadband. So in the interest of fair play: The article states that $400,000 is just part of the funding. The Co-op hopes to raise a total of $2,626,000 for 36 miles of a proposed 283 mile network. So that 36 miles would cost $40.40 per resident in the two counties. Sticking with the health-care comparison, that's less than my co-pay when I visit the ER. Sounds like B.S. to me. Verizon has gotten the cost down to about $900 per house passed. That does not count installation to each building. My guess is that is only the cost to run the cable. The nodes and splicing will be extra.
quote:
Rundgren said the justification for governmental investment in such a system is to help create an infrastructure to help businesses do business.
I hope you members of the great unwashed don't think this will benefit you. You are going to pay for it with $2,000,000.00 in government hand outs, that is tax money for those of you that don't pay tax. 1/2 million will come from investors, investors want to make money on their investments. The people that want to connect to the network will have to buy one of the 74,000 shares that will be sold. A price was not given for the cost of a share. Verizon is installing FIOS for free. Not in my CO yet darn.
quote:
The first phase would see 36 miles of broadband fiber from the Wythe County line through Pulaski County, including the towns of Pulaski and Dublin, to Christiansburg at the intersection of Virginia 114 and U.S. 460.
It would connect public schools, governmental administrative facilities, industrial parks, schools, New River Community College, the western campus of Radford University and the New River Valley Regional Jail. It would also be the start of a governmental network and provide access to businesses along the route.
If you are not the government or a fat cat business you are going to get squat. No one cares about the great unwashed, you don't have more then $40 a month to pay and that isn't going to cut it. | |
|
