 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to fifty nine
Re: Give Verizon a Medal said by fifty nine:So why pass a law banning it from the entire state? Maybe the taxpayers should decide on a municipality by municipality basis. That's a nice idea, except that elections are not allowed to exclude people who do not pay taxes.
But as always, local governments have plenty of responsibilities to deal with. They should focus on doing the things that they need to do and do them well. Wireless internet is not one of them.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012! |
|
| If a majority of the people want it, then you and the local monopolies should shut up and move out of the way of it getting done.
Government is there to serve the people. If the people ask for it's government to build them a network through a vote, then it is the governments responsibility to build them that network. If the minority don't like it, too bad. There is a minority in every vote that isn't happy. That is just the way it is and the reason you take it to a vote to begin with.
Verizon doesn't like it? Then pack up your stuff and get out of the town/state. |
|
1 edit | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:That's a nice idea, except that elections are not allowed to exclude people who do not pay taxes. As it should be. Do you know that the 24th amendment to the US constitution forbids a poll tax? This means that you can't exclude non-taxpayers, and for good reason. All citizens should be allowed to vote, period. |
|
|
|
 kyler13Is your fiber grounded?
join:2006-12-12
Arnold, MD | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:said by fifty nine:So why pass a law banning it from the entire state? Maybe the taxpayers should decide on a municipality by municipality basis. That's a nice idea, except that elections are not allowed to exclude people who do not pay taxes. But as always, local governments have plenty of responsibilities to deal with. They should focus on doing the things that they need to do and do them well. Wireless internet is not one of them. You're missing the point altogether. A private corporation intersted in nothing more than making money does not need to be empowered to make decisions for the people. |
|
 jhboricuaExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
1 edit | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:But as always, local governments have plenty of responsibilities to deal with. They should focus on doing the things that they need to do and do them well. Wireless internet is not one of them. Even if the local government in PA were to have a private entity build and operate the network, it would be prohibited by the proposed SB530 as currently worded.
Verizon is simply legislating their way to profits by blocking any chance of competition on PA before it happens, specially now that the stimulus bill would make it easier to build a competing network.
And this is another example why your continuous posts on other threads along the lines of 'if they want to compete, let them build their own networks' come as hypocritical, and rightfully so.
There is no level playing field.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Admin * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * |
|
 SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | reply to pnh102
Funny, election exclude corporations from voting and yet they still ultimately decide who the choices are, or even who gets elected. |
|
| reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:said by pnh102:That's a nice idea, except that elections are not allowed to exclude people who do not pay taxes. As it should be. Do you know that the 24th amendment to the US constitution forbids a poll tax? This means that you can't exclude non-taxpayers, and for good reason. All citizens should be allowed to vote, period. In general I agree with you, however in this case guys living in their mom's basement wanting fast cheap Internet shouldn't have say in this....  |
|
