|reply to Skipig |
The nature of the technology is that it is crap, like LTE. As a taxpayer you should be more concerned with the trillion or so per year the government burns without even 1 inch of fiber or any other perceptible accomplishment to show for it. If that waste is ever cleaned up, and taxes permanently capped, entirely privatizing hookup costs would be plausible topic for discussion
said by Wilsdom:
....... and taxes permanently capped, entirely privatizing hookup costs would be plausible topic for discussion
But now you are demanding MORE, you think Broadband is the highest priority, other would choose health care or food or defenese or public safety, or???
If you really want lower taxes EVERYONE must give up some or all of their DEMANDS and try to survive with less, someting we don't do well, but the first step would be to reject ALL new demands including broadband.
A fair point, but the dilemma is that countless expensive projects continue to be cooked up. You could say the supporters of those are thinking the same thing and just rushing to get their piece, but are they really, or are they just committed to corruption?
Or is is it more likely that most of it is not coruption ( at least not in the deliberate sense) and the promoters of each of these really believes it is important just as many here think fiber is important, and that given the current budget, that their idea should survive while others are cut.
I think if you look back to the reasons behind most programs you would likely find a compelling reason for most of them AS ORIGINALLY CONCIEVED.
the problem is, by the time they make it through the current legislative process, and survive budget cuts and program adjustment and modification of focus, both from the legislative side and the bureaucracy charged with running it, it is sometimes almost impossible to see that early purpose, and it costs many times what it was thought it would on day one.
It is time to begin considering each and every program and law to consider if it continues to serve a useful purpose NOW and to prepare to phase out those that don't. The tax code needs the same sort of " spring cleaning" but neither can change instantly.
I doubt we'll end up spending less, but maybe we can spend it better.
In the mean time I'm unsure if you will find support to take on another HUGE program, even if it would be wise to do so as a twenty year plan.