<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Therein lies the rub in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21092515</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:41:34 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:41:34 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Therein lies the rub</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21092515</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/648025"><b>Goldman</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  satellite68 <A HREF="/useremail/u/1452229"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>  :</small><br><br>   <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr><hr></blockquote><br><br>How, in the name of sweet Jesus, is meddling in the financial markets NOT similar to government intervention in other areas (say, broadband for instance)?<br> </div>Meddling in financial markets IS similar, but much worse for our long term stability.  There is no incentive for these institutions to behave if they know they are "too big to allow to fail"  This mindset leads to more and bigger bailouts as well as bailouts of corporations that should not be saved because of irresponsibility or because they are simply unable to compete in the global market (see: U.S. automakers)  These bailouts may relieve some short term pain, but the pain will have to come one day when we are unable to borrow any more to prop up our lifestyle.  When that day comes, broadband will be the least of our worries.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21092515</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 08:22:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Therein lies the rub</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21087131</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1452229"><b>satellite68</b></A> :  <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr>A lack of progress on the broadband policy front isn't because people are engaged in healthy debate over our broadband future, it's because incumbent operators have the American government wrapped around their finger. You would think that this is something that people on both sides of the aisle could agree needs fixing.<hr></blockquote><br><br>Apparently not, as our government continues its "Do as I say, not as I do" policies of intervention.  To wit:<br><br>Frannie Mae/Frannie Mac<br>Bear Stearns<br><br>Both of these qualify as the biggest government financial interventions in history.  You can't have your cake and eat it too.  "Smaller" government?  <br><br>Those who would want the government to play a core role in broadband infrastructure are almost always labelled socialists for this opinion.  How, in the name of sweet Jesus, is meddling in the financial markets NOT similar to government intervention in other areas (say, broadband for instance)?<br><br>I'm not advocating government programs for everything, mind you-but the chest thumping rhetoric regarding a national broadband policy (for starters) appears disingenuous to me.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21087131</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:20:01 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
