 DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Population density is good for deployment. That's the only story here. |
|
 WeSRT4
join:2000-11-20
Mobile, AL | Very legitimate point. However, most of the densely populated major metropolitan areas here in the US don't have FTTH. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Dogfather
pop density should make deployment more cost efficient, therefore more profitable, but high pop density doesn't guarantee deployment just like low pop density doesn't preclude deployment.
the OECD looked at how pop density impacted deployment and they found little or no correlation - high pop density areas were no more likely to have broadband than low density areas.
as already alluded to in comments, why don't NY, LA, DC, Boston, Atlanta, etc. etc. etc. all have fiber? |
|
1 edit | reply to WeSRT4
Japan: 872.8/sq mi
France: 293/sq mi
South Korea: 1,274/sq mi
These are the three top countries with the fastest internet speeds.
New Jersey: 1,134/sq mi
How come New Jersey can't offer the same speeds at a comparable price?
Population density is NOT the main reason why the US have not deployed faster internet. It's mostly government policy. We are the only industrialized country in the world with no national broadband plan. We've spend over a trillion dollars in Iraq already. Rather than spend it on some foreign country, we can use a fraction of that to wire the country(and bring actual benefits to our economy). |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to WeSRT4
But they're getting it.
»www.nytimes.com/2006/08/14/techn···zon.html |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
1 edit | reply to jersey7
Uh, last time I looked Verizon FiOS's fastest plans were available in New Jersey as is Cablevision...to the tune of 50Mb I believe.
Remember, FTTH isn't universally available in Japan either. |
|
 NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | reply to Dogfather
Not Really.
A more interesting point is where Verizon and AT&T claimed FTTH was too expensive waiting a few years announcing that prices came down (Verizon) while AT&T claims it's a mistake.
Clearly prices have been just fine and considering how everything is made over in that area of the world it makes me wonder who's telling the truth nowdays when it comes to expenses of upgrading their systems. Japan has been dealing with coming out of a recession for years while our economy has been on fire until recently.
I guess is we did not have a child running the FTC and had someone who's balls have dropped things might be different. |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to jersey7
said by jersey7:We've spend over a trillion dollars in Iraq already. Blah blah blah. More BDS. Nothing to see here, move along.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to jersey7
Yeah, and we (taxpayers) spend $60B (3X what Verizon will spend deploying FiOS) a year in Medicare fraud and $350B in Federal taxes goes uncollected every year.
What's your point other than a lame political rant? |
|
|
|
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:said by jersey7:We've spend over a trillion dollars in Iraq already. Blah blah blah. More BDS. Nothing to see here, move along. I used the Iraq factor to prove my point about the government. Remember, countries like South Korea have governments that work with providers in getting out FTTH and other new technologies by helping in funding and encouraging these large-scale projects. I'm not saying we should follow the path of the Koreans. But what I am really saying is that we Americans can do much better that what we are doing now. |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by jersey7:I used the Iraq factor to prove my point about the government. I'm not disputing this. We all got that point was that you believe the Iraq War is a waste of money and that the money we spend on it could be better spent on broadband deployment.
We could make the same point about any other government expenditure. For example, we've spent $7 trillion on the "War on Poverty" since the mid 1960s, but we have far more people getting government benefits now than they did in the 1960s with no end in sight.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
1 edit | reply to Dogfather
Why do you interpret it as just a political rant? The whole point is not to simply criticize the government for everything as you have probably portrayed my statement to be, but to prove the point of potential and to explain the insignificance of "population density in deployment". |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to jersey7
Americans are doing just fine. Plenty of residents in Jersey can get FiOS and/or Cablevision and those numbers increase every month.
The gov't has much bigger issues to tackle than giving telcos and cable operators billions to supply everyone BT and Pr0N connections. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to jersey7
said by jersey7:Why do you interpret it as just a political rant? Because it's a political rant. |
|
2 edits | No, you interpreted it as a political rant and you've failed to recognize the larger point of my post of why population density is not the deciding factor others perceived it to be. I acknowledge that I went on a short, small tangent with the government. However the main point still stands. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | A political rant by any other name is just as lame. |
|
| And a deliberate misinterpretation isn't?
I'm not going to sit with you and argue with you. The fact that you can't see the whole point even after my reiteration for my original reply demonstrates your lack of understanding and carelessness to even read the post and my reply throughly as I intended other readers to understand the point. |
|
| reply to nasadude
I love Japan
I love Japanese
I love sushi
I love fish
 |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to jersey7
said by jersey7:Japan: 872.8/sq mi France: 293/sq mi South Korea: 1,274/sq mi These are the three top countries with the fastest internet speeds. New Jersey: 1,134/sq mi How come New Jersey can't offer the same speeds at a comparable price? Population density is NOT the main reason why the US have not deployed faster internet. It's mostly government policy. We are the only industrialized country in the world with no national broadband plan. We've spend over a trillion dollars in Iraq already. Rather than spend it on some foreign country, we can use a fraction of that to wire the country(and bring actual benefits to our economy). Let me put it bluntly Government has the responsibility to protect it citizens hence spending in Iraq. Government has no damed business screwing around with the free market. There is no right to broadband in the Constitution. I do want government to
1. Define what is broadband
2. Tell me via government planning, what kind of broadband I need I know my needs.
3. Force any American via government planning and taxes, to spend on broadband infrastructure for and dubious unproven economic benefits.
4. plan such networks: socialism never works.
You are free to start you own business and by an OC-12 line if you think what the telecoms provided is not fast enough. Just do not involve my tax dollars. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to jersey7
Oh, I read the post and clearly saw your point, which as to Bush bash.
Do everyone a favor and save the political rants for the Red and Blue rooms. |
|
