 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to pnh102
Re: Good said by pnh102:said by Karl Bode:So you're saying that customers having access to limited one-off pre-qualification databases is the same thing as the government having accurate national broadband penetration, coverage and deployment data before making massive decisions? I am saying the government has no need for such information, as there is nothing it can do to improve broadband. Sure it can. I can give insentives to companies to build out broadband. Hard to do that when you don't know where it's needed. |
|
|
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by BF69:Sure it can. I can give insentives to companies to build out broadband. Hard to do that when you don't know where it's needed. Private companies do not need the government to tell them where to build. Most private companies can determine on their own where the most profitable areas to build will be.
--
"At the moment of conception." |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to BF69
Yawn. I get my broadband for free.
--
"At the moment of conception." |
|
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5
1 edit | pnh102,
Maybe you're on ignore because you don't add any substance. You don't give anyone any credit for a different opinion. Neither you nor your readers grow as a result of your contributions. I have just read 6 definitive messages in a row from you, none exhibiting any hint of critical thinking that might challenge your own positions.
As you pointed out, private companies can (and DO) determine on their own where the most profitable areas to build will be. So where are they building? For the past two years, they've been building where broadband already exists! We've had less than 1 percent of additional penetration -- in two years! So how do YOU purport to increase the availability of broadband to more Americans?
Can government manage a large-capacity network? We'll, it already manages several but that's beside the point. You and I probably agree that just because the government can do something doesn't mean that it should -- and we both probably agree that this particular idea has very limited merit. On the other hand, if the government does decide to take a role in retaking our top broadband ranking someday, what do you think should it do to move forward?
If you're just going to be offended or give me back another flat answer, then don't bother. But here's a chance to consider that those who respond to you are also serious about their own convictions and are inviting you to influence them -- not belittle them.
Robb
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by funchords:Maybe you're on ignore because you don't add any substance. No, I think people ignore me simply because they do not agree with me. I don't bother to ignore anyone because I don't care enough about them to put them on ignore.
said by funchords:I have just read 6 definitive messages in a row from you, none exhibiting any hint of critical thinking that might challenge your own positions. And exactly what did I say that was incorrect?said by funchords:We've had less than 1 percent of additional penetration -- in two years! Complete bull. There are numerous places that have gotten broadband that did not have it before. You can see numerous examples posted on this very site about private companies extending service to previously unserved areas. That can't possibly be an increase of 1%.
said by funchords: So how do YOU purport to increase the availability of broadband to more Americans? I believe that people who want broadband should invest their own private funds to build their own broadband solutions without the government getting involved.
said by funchords:On the other hand, if the government does decide to take a role in retaking our top broadband ranking someday, what do you think should it do to move forward? I really do not believe that this is as important as people think it is. Other countries that have invested significant tax revenue to build higher-end networks still have yet to surpass us in terms of GDP.
said by funchords:If you're just going to be offended or give me back another flat answer, then don't bother. I don't understand how you have concluded that I get offended ?
--
"At the moment of conception." |
|
funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | said by pnh102:I don't understand how you have concluded that I get offended ? Because you generally haven't been appearing to come here with any desire to learn and grow, nor do you feed those desires in others.
I really do not believe that this is as important as people think it is. Other countries that have invested significant tax revenue to build higher-end networks still have yet to surpass us in terms of GDP. THERE. Thank you. This is good stuff.
I see a correlation between a strong per-capita GDP and broadband penetration.
Take a look at this report »www.itif.org/index.php?id=143
or this report »www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0809/
and compare it to the per-capita GDP »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co···r_capita (sort the "rank" columns to see the data) and many of the same names pop out. While the relationship isn't perfect (expensive oil and cheap labor tend to skew some countries), I cannot conclude that availability of broadband and national productivity are unrelated.
I believe that people who want broadband should invest their own private funds to build their own broadband solutions without the government getting involved. I know that's what you want. But let's, theoretically, say that you don't get your first wish and we're going to do this. What is the best way to proceed and why?
There are numerous places that have gotten broadband that did not have it before. You can see numerous examples posted on this very site about private companies extending service to previously unserved areas. That can't possibly be an increase of 1%. What examples?
I am slightly off, I thought it was 2006-2008. The OECD data shows that between 2006 and 2007 years, the U.S. has advanced 1.36% and Canada is 0.00. So (for us in the US) it's one year and more than 1%. I really don't think 2008 will come in very strong, do you?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
