Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| reply to firephoto
Re: Earmarked?
said by firephoto  : Then there's the off chance that the major employer in these areas is agriculture. Agriculture isn't limited to the growing of good but also the people who are employed by it. Is there any meddling by the Dept. of Agriculture that's not justified by "addressing the needs of employees of agriculture?" line of reasoning?
Not everybody opposed muni broadband is on the take by the cable companies or the telcos.
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
Nuts
join:2006-04-27
Forest, OH
| Again, the program is administered under the Rural Development Program. This programs provides financing for programs for electric, water, telecommunications projects in rural areas.
They provide low interest loans for coops or communities that are over looked by for profit companies that do not see a quick enough return on their investment.
»www.rurdev.usda.gov/index.html |
|
firephoto
KDE
Premium
join:2003-03-18
 ·Verizon west (ex G..
| reply to Steve
said by Steve :said by firephoto : Then there's the off chance that the major employer in these areas is agriculture. Agriculture isn't limited to the growing of good but also the people who are employed by it. Is there any meddling by the Dept. of Agriculture that's not justified by "addressing the needs of employees of agriculture?" line of reasoning? Not everybody opposed muni broadband is on the take by the cable companies or the telcos. I'm sure they choose the dept. of agriculture to funnel these broadband funds through because the majority of agriculture jobs are minimum wage jobs. This makes it easy to target low income areas that large internet providers with the resources to build the infrastructure won't touch due to it not being profittable enough when only the single area is taken into account.
I see no reason for any geographic area of the country to be underserved by broadband and these financial incentives from the government help to provide these services in the rural areas. I'm all for a free market where there's no limitations on what one can or cannot do. I also see broadband or any connection to the "internet" as a utility and not something extra. I can choose to not have it or use it but it should be available no matter where one is located. It's no more or less important than a wired telephone.
--
Location: +48° 5' 23.40", -119° 48' 30.00" |
|
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
1 edit | reply to Nuts
said by Nuts :Again, the program is administered under the Rural Development Program. This programs provides financing for programs for electric, water, telecommunications projects in rural areas. They provide low interest loans for coops or communities that are over looked by for profit companies that do not see a quick enough return on their investment. Why shouldn't the people who choose one set of benefits of living in a certain area (nature, clean air, no spam) bear the cost of those choices rather than expect others to pay for their taste in living arrangements?
If I live in the big city, and something in the environment about that choice is expensive (say, parking), should the rural folks subsidize that for me? |
|
John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
·CenturyLink
| said by Steve :Why shouldn't the people who choose one set of benefits of living in a certain area (nature, clean air, nature) bear the cost of those choices rather than expect others to pay for their taste in living arrangements? Here in Oregon the urban schools actually cause a substantial negative flow of tax dollars away from the rural schools.
So I guess THAT sword cuts both ways...eh?
--
A is A |
|
Nuts
join:2006-04-27
Forest, OH
| reply to Steve
It takes a lot more money to support an urban area, than a rural. I garantee you that more of my tax money has gone to supporting those that live in cities, especially large cities, than I have ever gotten from them.
Why shouldn't I be able to get some of may tax money that I have paid back in a loan to a member owned to help me earn a better income. Which, by the way, equates back into more tax money for the urban areas to leach from me. |
|
