dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
10
share rss forum feed

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to MyDogHsFleas

Re: thank god I dont live in NC

While I don't know what Karl's motives are, I agree that it's unfair for the government to create non-profit competition. However, there's also truth to the other side in that these companies cherry-pick locations that require the least amount of investment with the greatest potential for return. That's certainly good business but it doesn't do anything for those that are left without or with only a single provider.

Somewhere there should be a middle ground. I know we all like things to have maximum contrast between right and wrong but it seldom works that way.

MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5
I agree and I view this bill as a good start towards seeking a middle ground.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to rradina
You do not know Karl's intentions saying so makes you look ignorant.

I would agree that a city should not be able to just put up any service at any time to compete with private companies. However, when those private companies have failed the city in providing the services (regardless of what the service is) then the city should have every right to bring services to their citizens in any way they see fit and their community votes for. Whether it is building a competing service or bringing in another company with X incentives to do so. The companies that currently provide service have had their chance and have failed so too bad for them.

In this case, it is quite clear that private companies have failed the community when they have to redefine what broadband is. So not only are they preventing anything from lighting a fire under their collective failed asses, but they are also attempting to deceive the community they are suppose to be serving.

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
While Karl seldom complements incumbents, does that mean Karl believes a government solution is superior? I believe he feels compelled to cry foul when either the government or corporations are failing the consumer.

In my opinion, the government has a duty to regulate in the absence of competition. The problem is we have a tough time defining what competition is. In the case of high speed Internet access, it's impossible to define competition until we have a universally accepted definition of the product.

For instance there are those that believe competition exists if you can get cable HSI or a telco T1 line even though one costs ~$50/month and the other ~$200/month.