dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
36

Tobester
join:2000-11-14
San Francisco, CA

Tobester to KCrimson

Member

to KCrimson

Re: That's what voting GOP gets you

said by KCrimson:

I think the courts should allow the community to waste their money as they please. If the current market hasn't seen a fiber startup until now, I'm sure it will either fail horribly............

We are in complete agreement.

For small rural areas without adequate internet services, who would like to install availability or capacity, it should be up to the community, not Corporate lobbyists.

We both know that Internet providers are "cherry-picking" the easiest installations.

By banding together smaller communities who might not ever see internet connections can advance, with the risks involved too.

KCrimson
Premium Member
join:2001-02-25
Brooklyn, NY

KCrimson

Premium Member

said by Tobester:

said by KCrimson:

I think the courts should allow the community to waste their money as they please. If the current market hasn't seen a fiber startup until now, I'm sure it will either fail horribly............

We are in complete agreement.

For small rural areas without adequate internet services, who would like to install availability or capacity, it should be up to the community, not Corporate lobbyists.

We both know that Internet providers are "cherry-picking" the easiest installations.

By banding together smaller communities who might not ever see internet connections can advance, with the risks involved too.

What you fail to see is that if there were a profit to be made, private corporations would have been competing to provide this service that the community seems to want so badly. Even if profits would take years, we've seen build-outs where initial capital expenditures are projected into many years (see Vz FiOS). Call it "cherry picking", or whatever, the fact remains that smaller communities that band together like this are stepping into an arena that the government was never intended in a market economy, and such experiments rarely if ever see their intended results without extreme cost or redistribution of resources or population.
Expand your moderator at work

Tobester
join:2000-11-14
San Francisco, CA

Tobester

Member

Re: That's what voting GOP gets you

said by KCrimson :

What you fail to see is that if there were a profit to be made, private corporations would have been competing to provide this service that the community seems to want so badly..................

Call it "cherry picking", or whatever, the fact remains that smaller communities that band together like this are stepping into an arena that the government was never intended in a market economy............

Sure they are.

Smaller communities have been doing this exact thing for years, such rural electric cooperatives, water districts and they like.

I understand your feeling government should not be involved in a market economy. However, how long would you have smaller communities wait in order to receive upgraded internet services?

The current "mega-internet" companies might not ever see enough return on investment to want to upgrade rural areas, hence my "cherry picking" comment.

The proposed North Carolina bill will specifically exclude these under-served communities from taking matters into their own hands to increase community internet options.

By a majority community vote, the electorate should be free to make their own decisions, agreeing to tax themselves for the greater good of the local community.

KCrimson
Premium Member
join:2001-02-25
Brooklyn, NY

KCrimson

Premium Member

You're describing cooperatives, so I'm sure that membership will be voluntary, and not amount to a general tax. This shouldn't be a problem in towns that have REAL problems, and not just a few enthusiasts that want to share the public's wealth for their own surfing.

Tobester
join:2000-11-14
San Francisco, CA

Tobester

Member

said by KCrimson:

You're describing cooperatives, so I'm sure that membership will be voluntary, and not amount to a general tax. This shouldn't be a problem in towns that have REAL problems, and not just a few enthusiasts that want to share the public's wealth for their own surfing.

Co-operative is your word

Think of Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Palo Alto Municipal Electric Co, City of Mesa, AZ Utilities, Navopache Electric (AZ). All are municipally owned and operated for the benefit of the community and offer cheaper electric rates than surrounding utility. (I'm sure there are other examples of telephone, and water districts I can't recall at the moment too )

I think your main problem is you don't want to pay for anything you do not personally think you benefit from regardless of whether the public has voted for it, or not.

Here in San Francisco, we have twice voted NOT to start the process of forming our own Electric Utility, and it was pushed hard by our elected City Officials.

KCrimson
Premium Member
join:2001-02-25
Brooklyn, NY

KCrimson

Premium Member

said by Tobester:

Co-operative is your word

Actually, it was you that brought up rural cooperatives, I just pointed to the principles of the idea.