| How much to wire the entire population Seriously, I would like a study to be commissioned to determine how much it would cost to wire up every apartment complex, house, farm, double-wide, high-rise, school and library to fiber.
How much would that be? 500 billion? 1 trillion? Isn't that worth it? How much could the government make BACK by leasing or selling the lines to multiple carriers so they can compete on it?
Fiber to every residence in america would mean voice (VoIP), video (IPTV), data (Internet) to every residence. They could literally replace all copper based services (POTS, DSL, T-Carrier access) with a much faster and less problematic back haul. OTA could even go away conceivably.
In a perfect world, the public networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, PBS, etc) could be combined with local phone access and 1mbps internet for free or cheap as a "Lifeline" service. That way public safety would still be in place without the use of OTA or POTS.
It can be done, just depends on how much. |
|
 atuarreHere come the drumsPremium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX | They don't want to compete. That is just it. The carriers are against anything that would be in the best interests of the consumer. |
|
| said by atuarre: The carriers are against anything that would be in the best interests of the consumer. No. That is inaccurate. They are against anything that would hurt their profits. And that isn't the same thing as what you said.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? |
|
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Philmatic
And how exactly do you propose to pay for this trillion dollar giveaway?
We don't need to wire the whole country with fiber. Most people can move if faster broadband is so important to them. Wireless ISPs and coops work in rural settings; you'll just to have accept that rural broadband will cost more and perform less. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
Sometimes it is. Sometimes it ain't. |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to elray
And how exactly do you propose to pay for this trillion dollar giveaway? Slash just 100 of our 850 military bases, and stop the practice of "nation building"? Not to veer too far off topic, but how many U.S. national fiber networks would the money we paid into Iraq pay for? You could probably pay for five national fiber networks just off of the last year's political pork. All of which taxpayers paid for without the same kind of face-fanning that happens when people propose actually investing taxpayer money into our broadband infrastructure. |
|
 bencPremium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL
·Charter
| reply to Philmatic
said by Philmatic:Seriously, I would like a study to be commissioned to determine how much it would cost to wire up every apartment complex, house, farm, double-wide, high-rise, school and library to fiber. How much would that be? 500 billion? 1 trillion? Isn't that worth it? How much could the government make BACK by leasing or selling the lines to multiple carriers so they can compete on it? Fiber to every residence in america would mean voice (VoIP), video (IPTV), data (Internet) to every residence. They could literally replace all copper based services (POTS, DSL, T-Carrier access) with a much faster and less problematic back haul. OTA could even go away conceivably. In a perfect world, the public networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, PBS, etc) could be combined with local phone access and 1mbps internet for free or cheap as a "Lifeline" service. That way public safety would still be in place without the use of OTA or POTS. It can be done, just depends on how much. I've often wondered about that too. I don't usually like the idea of involving government, but I don't see how else it's going to work. The government after all made rural electrification happen. If it wasn't for that, how long would rural customers have had to wait until they got electricity from the power company?
If, and hopefully when this happens, I would like to see the lines be leased "at cost" to multiple carriers. When I say "at cost," I mean just enough to make back the costs of building the network over maybe 30 years or so. Not "below cost," since that means other taxes will be needed to subsidize it, and not "above cost," since that means the government would then make a profit. |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
Thank you! I've said the same thing before all the money could hook us up with FTTH. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
It's not always the same thing.
But it usually is. |
|
 P NessYou'Ve Forgotten 9-11 AlreadyPremium
join:2001-08-29
way way out | reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode:And how exactly do you propose to pay for this trillion dollar giveaway? Slash just 100 of our 850 military bases, and stop the practice of "nation building"? Not to veer too far off topic, but how many U.S. national fiber networks would the money we paid into Iraq pay for? You could probably pay for five national fiber networks just off of the last year's political pork. All of which taxpayers paid for without the same kind of face-fanning that happens when people propose actually investing taxpayer money into our broadband infrastructure. sure lets cut all these to pay for FIBER....
lets not put education, homeless, healthcare, cure for cancer, feed the hungry....etc first....
the investment in FIBER to the home would not generate the returns.
--
 |
|
 tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
·Comcast
| reply to Philmatic
said by Philmatic:... How much would that be? 500 billion? 1 trillion? Isn't that worth it? Maybe, it depends what it's used for, and how it is paid back ( I don't wish to pay for some hillbilly wanker to download Porn at GB/second, on the other hand if it gives him/her a valid chance at a taxpaying career...)said by Philmatic:... How much could the government make BACK by leasing or selling the lines to multiple carriers so they can compete on it? Probably nothing, the Gov't isn't designed to or good at making money.. best /most optimsic outcome would be break even on the direct service costs, make up the capital cost on tax revenue. |
|
Reviews:
·Northland Cable ..
| reply to elray
I don't totally agree with that. I live on a pretty good size farm on which a many of my irragation are having to run off satellite. And for some reason I find it hard to farm in the middle of the city but according to you and the rest of the people that live in cities we country folks don't deserve it even though in reality I probably have more use for internet than u do. I think it would be pretty forthe people that complains that the underserved don't need internet should have there internet restricted to only be able to have satellite and see how long they last. Imo |
|
| reply to Philmatic
said by Philmatic:Seriously, I would like a study to be commissioned to determine how much it would cost to wire up every apartment complex, house, farm, double-wide, high-rise, school and library to fiber. How much would that be? 500 billion? 1 trillion? Isn't that worth it? How much could the government make BACK by leasing or selling the lines to multiple carriers so they can compete on it? Fiber to every residence in america would mean voice (VoIP), video (IPTV), data (Internet) to every residence. They could literally replace all copper based services (POTS, DSL, T-Carrier access) with a much faster and less problematic back haul. OTA could even go away conceivably. In a perfect world, the public networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, PBS, etc) could be combined with local phone access and 1mbps internet for free or cheap as a "Lifeline" service. That way public safety would still be in place without the use of OTA or POTS. It can be done, just depends on how much. 62B / 14m ~4,500 per household. In 2008 there were 129m households '»quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html' tack on another 1mil for the 500k rate that we have been running the last 2 years, for 130m total. 4,500x 130 = 585B |
|
 neowulf
join:2000-10-20
Port Orange, FL | reply to P Ness
I think Karl's point is valid. We spend trillions on bases, some of which are no longer needed but we still spend money on them that serves no interest to real defense, just a money sink.
You are right that we should put money into education, homeless, health-care, cures for diseases and make sure starving people in our country are feed before putting in a fiber network.
The investment in our military is also not generating any returns. But the amount of money that is wasted could do everything you mentioned plus bonuses such as a fiber network for all.
We would all be living a much better life if our military was scaled back to just defense, and not used to police the world. But that isn't the American way, we believe in a big military rather then all the things you mentioned. |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
Sorry, Karl, I would prefer the military bases to broadband. The nation building I can agree with. |
|
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN Reviews:
·Integra Telecom
 ·voip.ms
 ·T-Mobile US
1 edit | reply to Philmatic
said by Philmatic:Seriously, I would like a study to be commissioned to determine how much it would cost to wire up every apartment complex, house, farm, double-wide, high-rise, school and library to fiber. How much would that be? 500 billion? 1 trillion? Isn't that worth it? How much could the government make BACK by leasing or selling the lines to multiple carriers so they can compete on it? Fiber to every residence in america would mean voice (VoIP), video (IPTV), data (Internet) to every residence. They could literally replace all copper based services (POTS, DSL, T-Carrier access) with a much faster and less problematic back haul. OTA could even go away conceivably. A lot of apartments and hi-rises (newer buildings) are already wired with Cat 5e or Cat 6. IMO, that's already sufficient for awhile, no need to replace those infrastructures with fiber.
What those buildings need is FTTB. From there, copper can handle the rest without much of a fuss. And yes, copper can still deliver video, data, and voice.
I think some people still think the fiber is this magical material that solves all of our problems. What you need to understand is the effectiveness of fiber, and that's when it's outdoors and used for long distances. Single family homes (suburbs) will obviously benefit from fiber. MDU environments can still utilize copper indoors but utilize fiber-to-the-building for proper service. So really, the more urban environments that have buildings already wired with Cat 5e or Cat 6, it should be very easy to get high speeds to everyone. |
|
|
|
| reply to P Ness
quote:
the investment in FIBER to the home would not generate the returns.
That's simply not true. If you structure the payback on the system over a 10-20 year period, you not only stimulate the economy with a massive national construction project but generate a significant return on investment once debt is paid off. |
|
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode:And how exactly do you propose to pay for this trillion dollar giveaway? Slash just 100 of our 850 military bases, and stop the practice of "nation building"? No argument here - we could can certainly recoup a lot of money from our military budget and the off-balance-sheet war funding - but that would only reduce the deficit, not pay for new entitlements. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to elray
Then why does every last place have telephone and mains power, yet no DSL or cable? If mains power and POTS was installed to a particular property and the property sits on a county plowed and maintained road, why can't it have fiber? |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to P Ness
said by P Ness:sure lets cut all these to pay for FIBER.... lets not put education, homeless, healthcare, cure for cancer, feed the hungry....etc first.... the investment in FIBER to the home would not generate the returns. What do you do when the homeless want to be homeless? when being on welfare and off the books begging is an easier job than working? There will never be a cure for cancer, the same way there will never be a nuclear WW3, nobody funds cures, if you cure someone, you can't make more money off them. Feed the hungry? Food stamps and welfare already fix that.
K-12 education is hopelessly broken, $50/hr and pension for a person that never aspired higher than "liberal arts" in college, lowering the standard to increase graduation, never hold parents responsible for the kid never doing homework in 12 years. If public education worked, private schools wouldn't exist. If public school was as good as private, only an idiot would pay twice, once as property tax, other as private tuition, for the same education for their kid. Then the overpaid public teachers get the extra tuition a private school student paid in property taxes. Rewarding failure.
Fiber is the same investment roads, law enforcement, garbage pickup, etc is. |
|
