how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to pnh102
Re: Funny Stuff said by pnh102:There are certain services which government at any given level is tasked with providing. Municipal broadband doesn't rank up there at all. That's what some people said about water, fire, police, sewer, etc.
You have a tendency to accept all the social involvement in markets as "ordinary." But, anything new isn't. Ignoring that the things you consider to be ordinary weren't considered thus at some time in the past.
That's fine. It's typical democracy. (You're ok with ox-goring as long as it's not your ox being gored. You're ok with government involvement in water and sewer markets because you benefit, and you don't choose to compete in those spaces.).
I just think you discredit your own position when you use absolutist rhetoric, like how a law should prevent government from involving itself in any business. You don't really mean that. Like everyone else, you really mean the businesses you think government shouldn't be involved in. I.e., the ones you don't feel you'd benefit as much from.
There's no need to put on an air of righteousness when you're no different than everyone else.
Mark | |
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by amigo_boy:That's what some people said about water, fire, police, sewer, etc. Regardless of what other people have said, it still cannot be said that municipal broadband ranks up there with such services.
said by amigo_boy:(You're ok with ox-goring as long as it's not your ox being gored. You're ok with government involvement in water and sewer markets because you benefit, and you don't choose to compete in those spaces.). And again, there are things government at a given should be doing. These are usually things that the free market is incapable of providing, but are needed anyway. Municipal broadband is not one of those things, and never will be.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012! | |
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by pnh102:said by amigo_boy:That's what some people said about water, fire, police, sewer, etc. Regardless of what other people have said, it still cannot be said that municipal broadband ranks up there with such services. 1889: Regardless of what people say, it still cannot be said municipal sewer ranks up there with such services.
1899: " " municipal water " ".
1909: " " municipal police " ".
1919: " " municipal animal " ".
1929: " " municipal zoning " ".
You're just the guy in 2009 that nobody will refer to in 2059 when someone like you says "all that other stuff is legitimate. But this! this is different."
The thing is: Most people can discuss whether a new technological development and resulting social challenge are good candidates for inclusion within the social umbrella without resorting to self-serving and false absolutist rhetoric.
That's what diminishes your position. Instead of saying why it's wrong, you couch your position from on high ("Harumph! I'm a true conservative! True conservatives don't support government involvement in business.... hey, there goes the street sweeper. I sure dig the street sweeper...").
Mark | |
| reply to pnh102
What's so wrong with municipal networks? As long as it doesn't use tax money (stick a bond issue on the ballot, if it passes good, if not then tough luck), is self-sustaining (makes enough money to pay for it's upkeep) and is needed by that particular municipality (in other words, if the area has been neglected by existing carriers) I don't see a problem.
I don't believe a muni network will work everywhere (larger cities, for example, are usually sufficiently served by existing carriers). But in places like Wilson, NC or Lafayette, LA there was a need that was clearly neglected by incumbent carriers. From what I hear those projects are supporting themselves without relying on tax revenues.
The answer will never be all government but it will never be all business either. At some point it comes down to some combination of the two. Eventually a business or industry will grow to the point where some level of government is necessary for it's own survival. This is similar to the checks and balances we (supposedly) have in our own government. We never cede absolute power or authority to any one entity.
| | |
|
| reply to pnh102
I do not know you sir but to me you sound like just another mouth piece.
Fire, water, sewer, Police. All worth Programs. Necessary and Vital. Also ALL Money pits that must be funded year after year. its there nature and are a needed serve to the people. that's what our taxes pay for. all well and good yes.
Municipal broadband? a needed service? a necessity? Maybe not so much. A Revenue stream? YES. you see the City, town, State, Whatever builds it People subscribe to it, Said city, town, state makes a profit and said money goes back into the city, town, state coffers to be used for the people of that municipality.
Frankly i don't understand people like you. Short sighted Drones who will take any opportunity to lick the boots of entrenched power rather than make your own power. It's sad really.
Always remember to Follow the money First before you Speak. you'll Embarrass yourself less. | |
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:But this! this is different." Because municipal broadband is indeed different. It does not provide any of the life-sustaining benefits that the other government services you mention provide.
No one is going to die young if they can't get on a municipal broadband network. We have numerous places all over the country in which people live long, productive lives but cannot get broadband. Ergo, it isn't a needed expense.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012! | |
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to vzw emp
said by vzw emp :
What's so wrong with municipal networks? As long as it doesn't use tax money (stick a bond issue on the ballot, if it passes good, if not then tough luck), is self-sustaining (makes enough money to pay for it's upkeep) and is needed by that particular municipality (in other words, if the area has been neglected by existing carriers) I don't see a problem. It is a problem because there are next to no examples of "self sustaining municipal broadband." Almost every situation in which a government has decided to go down the broadband path has resulted in either tax money being used to subsidize the service or fees for other municipal services being raised to subsidize the service. Either way, it means there is less money going to other services that governments do indeed need to provide.
What if the same people voted to build a municipally funded stadium, even if schools were shoddy and crime was rampant due to a lack of police?
As for people simply voting to create an entitlement, it is always funny how there's never a question that asks how such a thing will be paid for.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012! | |
|
