how-to block ads
|reply to WiseOldBear |
Re: Nationalize All Communication Companies
What you suggest is too difficult to do constitutionally. Even in wartime it is difficult. What is needed is competition. A great way to do that is partnerships between electric power companies and local city/county governments to build FTTH systems. Another way would be to do what the Japanese and other nations have done, which is to compel local loop un-bundling of DSL POTS telephone lines. This would allow line sharing by competitors. The natural properties of hybrid fiber coax systems, from what I have read, do not allow the same type sharing so you cannot do any line sharing there. What you can do is have new state laws written concerning cable HSI performance. Either the state or local governments could impose fines for reliability or advertised performance failures, similar to the sanctions that used to exist for POTS providers. The government could help to ensure that build-out requirements are actually completed. In my state of Georgia AT&T would have to do what they said they would do when they got a statewide franchising law for wired pay video service. They would be required to extend the maximum Uverse capability to every single residential and business that uses AT&T telephone lines. Everyone would be able to get the top VDSL speed tier(24Mbps/3Mbps) and number of simultaneous different HD channels to watch(4). You got your deregulation, now build the network you said you would, OR pay steep fines.
Line sharing is possible on cable. TWC does it. It works in a similar way as a resold DSL connection. Everything stays on the owner's last mile network until the CMTS and then moves out to the actual ISP's backbone/network. The customer would get an IP/DNS from the actual ISP and not the last mile owner.
TWC with Elink:
Elink- CMTS/TWC- Fiber- NODE- Coax - Customer
RR over TWC:
RR Network- CTMS/TWC - Fiber- Node, Coax- Customer.
As far as new state laws governing the Internet, who do you think is going to enforce that? The gov't has no control over the Internet as its an information service, and NOT a telcom service. You can write laws and rules until your face is blue but doesn't mean they'll be followed. Many state PUCs will take complaints for Internet problems, but nothing will be done. The FCC is tied up in court already for their "governing" of the Internet and they're as worthless as it comes for anything unless you're a company such as Clear Channel that needs them to exist to protect your company from pirate radio stations.
And by your claim of making the PRIVATE companies build out into areas that are not deemed profitable by any ISP and telco would death of that company. And do you realize the your state would be slapped so hard by the courts and run into bankruptcy faster than they could fine AT&T? AT&T built a network, it services the public and they followed the laws set forth by the state. Now, they can tell the state to deal with it, or be gone themselves. Or they can be very nice and just shut the U-Verse network off and go back to DSL and regular POTS.
And as far as the Feds operating a company; we all know and seen what they have done to the USPO and what has happened to Amtrak. Both money pits and Amtrak should be sold off to Virgin and become a real company.
Interesting line sharing system. I had read that in order for all the line and signal quality features built into DOCSIS 3.0 to work, that there had to be only one ISP monitoring and adjusting amplifiers, signal generators, and other hardware. The D3 standard was supposed to lead to a more automated physical plant health monitoring system, that could apply corrections or provide detailed trouble warnings. I guess TWC is still responsible for the coaxial physical plant, but the other two are leasing on it.
As far as laws and regulations go they can be changed, as long as they are constitutional. Remember AT&T and the Baby Bells promised they were going to build an advanced network in exchange for expensive favors from the general public in the form of tax and regulatory policy changes. They failed to do so. The citizens can decide to change that situation by voting in representatives who will work to change laws, tax policies, and regulations.
The federal government does not need to attempt to operate an nationwide ISP to solve the problems of monopoly or duopoly, the states have that authority already. Some states have policies that would allow counties or cities to build the networks. Some states actually put the responsibility for such decisions down to the local level, the same as water, sewage, gas, electricity, public transport, parks, museums, fire departments, law enforcement, hospitals, and public schools. If the voters decide that they need a service the private sector will not provide at what they deem to be a reasonable cost, they can tax themselves to provide that service. If the project fails, then it is no different than a space mission that fails. The people conducted an experiment and found it did not work. They can try again with the knowledge of experience or not try again. There are several municipal or public utility fiber optic networks that are used as ISPs for the general public. Some have been successful in their mission to provide a needed public utility at a reasonable cost. Some have not been successful. We should allow other local governments and their citizens to look at the history of these projects and decide for themselves if they wish to try them.
The USPS would be much better off financially if it did not have to follow a retirement funding policy that no other entity, public or private, is required to follow. Good intentions to protect retirement funds have created problems with operating funds. The retirement policy could be modified by the US Congress. Even the postal workers unions admit the retirement funding policy is too strict and they would agree to changes to the requirement.
Amtrak books are cooked to make the Northeast Corridor look good and the long distance trains look bad. There are a lot of capital improvements in the Northeast Corridor that are hidden under "maintenance" when it is convenient and maintenance costs that are hidden under "capital improvements" when that is more advantageous. There is more to this, but I will get admonished by the moderator for going off topic for too long, so I will stop here.
TWC has had the line sharing system since the TW/AOL merger. TWC has several options across its network as a whole for HSI networks. There are several wholesale HSI companies that will give you access to become your own cable HSI provider. Comcast also does this with ELink in maybe 5 markets. D3 didn't stop this, except allows it to go on as it has for years. But yes, TWC owns and operates the actual network and then the ISPs "cross-connect" into the actual network at the peering points/data centers in each state/market.
AT&T also built their advanced network. Anyone was and able to obtain fiber Internet connections and still can today. They didn't say they would be affordable for everyone to purchase one. And now they have U-Verse. So as far as a court would see it; their promises were met. The same as VZ/GTE in PA. Which is why people who think munis are the great thing for FTTH aren't really looking hard for fiber access as Comcast, and TWC and every other MSO will sell you GigE ad Fiber connections today in all markets. You don't need a local gov't doing that and looking through your data or raising taxes after the project implodes. Which is why Muni companies are never a success. They actually are the opposite. Especially with raising content prices and ongoing costs. They're never able to fully make any money, as they charge "break even" or below what they pay. Which is why federal laws are pending to stop them.