Verizon Funded Think Tank Skewers Muni-Fi Suggests once again banning such operations... The Pacific Research Institute is attacking muni-broadband yet again, with a report entitled "Wi-Fi Waste: The Disaster of Municipal Communications Networks." PRI takes funds from AT&T and Verizon, then pretends to field objective analysis of municipal broadband that frequently worms its way into national newspapers as "science." Wi-Fi expert Glenn Fleishman deconstructs (via Techdirt) their latest "sock puppetry," noting the piece cherry picks old data, cites successes as failures and falsely uses BPL as a competitive panacea (much like the FCC's Martin does) to justify deregulation. Worse, he notes that despite the report's title, they actually only study a grand total of three Muni-Fi networks, while ignoring successful public-private partnerships (by far the most popular financial model). Verizon execs like Tom Tauke can take a cheerful public stance on Muni-Fi, because they essentially outsource the smearing of competing muni-operations to third parties.
|
  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
1 edit |  If you would like to read the actual report ....
»www.pacificresearch.org/pub/sab/···aste.pdf
If you don't want to read the approx 80 pg report, they have a 1 page executive summary at the beginning.
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|  | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... Tee Hee.
quote:
An effort in some localities to build government-run communications systems, or “muni telecom networks,” has blundered its way through the marketplace, eroding private investment, slowing high-tech innovation, deceiving consumers, and serving the interests
of politicians.
Deception! Innovation Erosion! Fight the man! Uh.... | |
| | |  EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by Karl Bode:Tee Hee. quote:
An effort in some localities to build government-run communications systems, or “muni telecom networks,” has blundered its way through the marketplace, eroding private investment, slowing high-tech innovation, deceiving consumers, and serving the interests
of politicians.
Deception! Innovation Erosion! Fight the man! Uh.... I firmly believe that it's not the place of government to spend tax dollars on networks, hotels, etc.
tax dollars are for 3 main functions in this order.
Safety (Military,Fire, Police, etc)
Education
Roads (Transportation)
The rest of the needs can be met by the private sector. | |
| | | | | | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... look at Korea... they spend their tax dollars on networks... and look how bad they are doing(sarcasm) | |
| | | | | | | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... Not to mention the innovation erosion....I mean crikey.... | |
| | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | said by remusrm:look at Korea... they spend their tax dollars on networks... and look how bad they are doing(sarcasm) When do you expect to move there? | |
| | | | | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by EnasYorl:said by remusrm:look at Korea... they spend their tax dollars on networks... and look how bad they are doing(sarcasm) When do you expect to move there? Wow, that really deals with the substance of this statement... 
--
Prove it... | |
| | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West
4 edits | Re: If you would like to read the actual report ....said by bmn:said by EnasYorl:said by remusrm:look at Korea... they spend their tax dollars on networks... and look how bad they are doing(sarcasm) When do you expect to move there? Wow, that really deals with the substance of this statement... :uhh: There was NO substance. No facts, no links, etc.
It was a WAG and it the same as someone pumping a stock because they "Think" it will go too the moon.
My comment was if you're in love with what a foreign country is doing, then move there.
»www.asianinfo.org/asianinfo/kore···aphy.htm
TERRITORY
The total area of the peninsula, including the islands, is 22,154 square kilometers of which about 45 percent (99,313 square kilometers), excluding the area in the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), constitutes the territory of South Korea. The combined territories of South and North Korea is similar in size of Britain (244,100 square kilometers) and Guyana (215,000 square kilometers). South Korea along is about the size of Hungary (93,000 square kilometers) and Jordan (97.700 square kilometers). | |
| | | | | | | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by EnasYorl:There was NO substance. No facts, no links, etc. It was a WAG and it the same as someone pumping a stock because they "Think" it will go too the moon. My comment was if your in love with what a foreign country is doing, then move there. Actually, the poster pointed out that Korea had used tax dollars to build out its high speed fibre network and so far its worked well for them. That was quite easy to glean from the post. Not sure how you could have missed that.
--
Prove it... | |
| | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West
4 edits | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by bmn: Korea had used tax dollars to build out its high speed fibre network and so far its worked well for them. That was quite easy to glean from the post. Not sure how you could have missed that.
If you want socialism then it works out for you.
Also it's more cost effective for them to burn tax monies then here.
As Korea has one of the highest average population densities in the world, comparable to the most heavily populated areas in the United States and Europe. »www.cet.edu/ete/modules/korea/po···map.html
People shouldn't have to pay for services that they cannot receive.
We have farms that have to pay taxes on Public Bus systems yet there isn't a Bus for miles of the Farm. It's the point I'm making.
Private sector of supply and demand works. It's called Capitalism.
And just because you can do something doesn't mean it's a good idea. | |
| | | | | | | | | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by EnasYorl:As Korea has one of the highest average population densities in the world, comparable to the most heavily populated areas in the United States and Europe. » www.cet.edu/ete/modules/korea/po···map.htmlPeople shouldn't have to pay for services that cannot receive. Considering most of the initiatives here in the US are not nationwide and are isolated to small towns and cities, then frankily, that's not really a problem.
Private sector works. It's called Capitalism. Sometimes... You forgot the magic magic word, sometimes, since nothing always works.
The reason this whole municipal debate is going on is because the private sector hasn't been working in some places. They've either dragged their feet or have done nothing and then complained when the people have decided to pick up the slack.
--
Prove it... | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West
1 edit | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by bmn:said by EnasYorl:As Korea has one of the highest average population densities in the world, comparable to the most heavily populated areas in the United States and Europe. » www.cet.edu/ete/modules/korea/po···map.htmlPeople shouldn't have to pay for services that cannot receive. Considering most of the initiatives here in the US are not nationwide and are isolated to small towns and cities, then frankily, that's not really a problem. -->IT IS A PROBLEM when any Government starts to compete with private sector in which in can operate at a loss forever, but not the private business owner. Private sector works. It's called Capitalism. Sometimes... You forgot the magic magic word, sometimes, since nothing always works. -->IF IT FAILS IT WASN'T A GOOD BUSINESS MODEL THEN. The reason this whole municipal debate is going on is because the private sector hasn't been working in some places. They've either dragged their feet or have done nothing and then complained when the people have decided to pick up the slack. Laws of supply and demand. Broadband is not a given right. And has plenty of alternatives. ie. Satellite etc.
It's not dragging your feet. These deployments cost more then $50 per foot of plant build out for underground deployments. | |
| | | | | | | | | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by EnasYorl:IT IS A PROBLEM when any Government starts to compete with private sector in which in can operate at a loss forever, but not the private business owner. Well, if you were up to date on what's going on, in some case, the municipalities are building out because providers aren't and so they aren't competing... Additionally, the reason the private sector doesn't build out because is because it can't expect a return ever, but because it can't expect a return immediately. Business is very short sighted.
Private sector works. It's called Capitalism. Sometimes... You forgot the magic magic word, sometimes, since nothing always works. -->IF IT FAILS IT WASN'T A GOOD BUSINESS MODEL THEN.
--
Prove it... | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by bmn:Well, if you were up to date on what's going on, in some case, the municipalities are building out because providers aren't and so they aren't competing... Additionally, the reason the private sector doesn't build out because is because it can't expect a return ever, but because it can't expect a return immediately. Business is very short sighted. That doesn't prove anything. Doesn't prove that capitalism works 100% of the time. To believe that capitalism is totally effective is foolish, extremist thinking not based on logic or fact. 1. example of recent private sector deployment »wifi.google.com/
2. Which Country has the largest Market Cap?
3. Almost 90% of the world's technology innovation has come from USA in a free market. It's foolish to ignore this fact.
»www.spectrum.ieee.org/nov06/4699 | |
| | | | | | | | | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... And ? There are also examples of public sector deployments that have worked just as well.
2. Which Country has the largest Market Cap? Currently, the United States... However, to say that is because of capitalism is falling into the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
That would be true if you look only as far back as the creation of the US patent system...
And you've proven what exactly ? Once again, you have not proven that capitalism can deliver all the time. The market can and sometimes does fail to meet demands. And sometimes government meets those demands because the market chooses not to.
For example, the reason that the government launches satellites is because it is so incredibly expensive to do it, there is no way a company could do it, so government has to. People talk about privatizing parts of NASA, the problem is that there aren't any takers because launching satellites and running pure scientific research doesn't turn a profit big enough for investors to be happy or even one at all.
Municipal deployments are the same thing. Private industry doesn't deploy because deploying won't turn a profit soon enough or large enough, so the local community steps in , waits for the break even point and deals with the meager profit.
The fact is this... Never say never or always.
--
Prove it... | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West
2 edits | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by bmn:said by EnasYorl:For example, the reason that the government launches satellites is because it is so incredibly expensive to do it, there is no way a company could do it, so government has to. People talk about privatizing parts of NASA, the problem is that there aren't any takers because launching satellites and running pure scientific research doesn't turn a profit big enough for investors to be happy or even one at all. You better check your facts more closely. The bulk of communications satellites are privately owned. And the Rockets are built by private companies. Some examples » www.isr.umd.edu/~michalis/satell···es1.htmlLockheed » www.space.com/missionlaunches/la···nch.html | |
| | | | | | | | | |  tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:5
 ·Fairpoint Commun..
 ·Hollis Hosting
| Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by EnasYorl: The bulk of communications satellites are privately owned. And the Rockets are built by private companies. To some degree same could be said of the highway system, they are built by private companies, however ownership and control remains in the public sector.
The question facing us is should First-Mile high-speed Internet access to be treated as a public utility like: water, sewer, electricity, police, file, roads etc: managed by the government as a public resource regardless of who actually builds it.
Or, be left entirely to private enterprise to build what they want to serve their corporate needs.
This is not a debate over good and evil it is about how to balance competing demands to maximize public benefit and minimize negatives.
My opinion is First-Mile access is an inherent monopoly. There will be little if any competition and network owners have strong incentives to bundle access with services to maximize profitability.
We need to decouple bit-delivery from service delivery. If First-Mile access providers want to offer value add services fine. Bit and service must stand on their own and cannot be used to cross-subsidize each other.
If I find it desirable to purchase Internet access, telephone, TV, Music and video, etc from a single provider that's fine. If I don't then I should be able to purchase Internet access at a competitive price and other services from third-party suppliers on a nondiscriminatory basis.
For those of you old enough to remember this is similar to the debate that occurred during telephone deregulation. Remember until the 1980's Ma-Bell rented you a phone and decided what services were available over the telephone network.
/Tom | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West
3 edits | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by tschmidt:said by EnasYorl: The bulk of communications satellites are privately owned. And the Rockets are built by private companies. To some degree same could be said of the highway system, they are built by private companies, however ownership and control remains in the public sector. The question facing us is should First-Mile high-speed Internet access to be treated as a public utility like: water, sewer, electricity, police, file, roads etc: managed by the government as a public resource regardless of who actually builds it. Or, be left entirely to private enterprise to build what they want to serve their corporate needs. This is not a debate over good and evil it is about how to balance competing demands to maximize public benefit and minimize negatives. My opinion is First-Mile access is an inherent monopoly. There will be little if any competition and network owners have strong incentives to bundle access with services to maximize profitability. We need to decouple bit-delivery from service delivery. If First-Mile access providers want to offer value add services fine. Bit and service must stand on their own and cannot be used to cross-subsidize each other. If I find it desirable to purchase Internet access, telephone, TV, Music and video, etc from a single provider that's fine. If I don't then I should be able to purchase Internet access at a competitive price and other services from third-party suppliers on a nondiscriminatory basis. For those of you old enough to remember this is similar to the debate that occurred during telephone deregulation. Remember until the 1980's Ma-Bell rented you a phone and decided what services were available over the telephone network. /Tom Actually most companies buy satellite time from HUGHES/Boeing, not the government.
Boeing's deal with Hughes, the world's largest satellite maker, puts Boeing in a position to cash in on potential growth in the commercial satellite industry.
Boeing already is the largest aerospace company in the world, as well as NASA's leading contractor and the prime builder of the 16-nation International Space Station.
The move, Boeing said, is expected to boost its annual space and communications revenues by more than a third -- to $10 billion. The Hughes businesses were expecting revenues last year of about $2.3 billion though the company is $2 billion in debt.
Hughes has a backlog of more than 36 satellites valued at more than $4 billion.
"Boeing intends to be number one in space," said Phil Condit, Boeing chairman, in a company statement. "This acquisition is a significant step forward in executing our goal of becoming the industry leader in integrated, space-based information and communications."
The acquisition, Condit said, "is an excellent strategic fit" for Boeing.
For Hughes, the deal provides much-needed cash for its growing satellite TV venture, DirecTV. The Los Angeles-based company, which has built nearly 40 percent of the world's commercial satellites, now plans to concentrate on expanding DirecTV and restructuring its other wireless communications services. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| quote:
This is not a debate over good and evil it is about how to balance competing demands to maximize public benefit and minimize negatives.
Boiled down to bones, it's a debate about greed versus humanism. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | said by EnasYorl:You better check your facts more closely. The bulk of communications satellites are privately owned. And the Rockets are built by private companies. Actually, my facts are spot on... You just are looking at the wrong spot. Once again, NASA and the military are the ones who are paid, almost exclusively, to run nearly all launch operations in the US. It might be privately owned equipment going up, but NASA and the military and the ones in the business of launching those vehicles.
So, nice try, but no cookie for you.
--
Prove it... | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | quote:
If you want socialism then it works out for you.
Can we craft a Godwin's law like rule for when the term "socialism" is applied to the idea of actually having a sound telecom infrastructure plan? | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by Karl Bode: quote:
If you want socialism then it works out for you.
Can we craft a Godwin's law like rule for when the term "socialism" is applied to the idea of actually having a sound telecom infrastructure plan? The core of socialism is centralize planning. The idea the government can efficiently plan control and pay for infrastructure or institutions. We have 90 years of Socialism from Soviet Union to European Democracy to show Socialism does not work. A centralized government plan telecom and own infrastructure fits the definition of Socialism. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... For a country spending trillions on Iraq, throwing one billion at more rural telecom infrastructure to ensure coverage is not "socialism." That term is used to coin images of Che Guevara wielding an AK-47 by partisans intoxicated with the delusion that industry is infallible.
A better term might be "giving a shit." Or perhaps "actually doing something." Or better yet, "not pretending corporate reacharounds are effective telecom policy." | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by Karl Bode:For a country spending trillions on Iraq, throwing one billion at more rural telecom infrastructure to ensure coverage is not "socialism." That term is used to coin images of Che Guevara wielding an AK-47 by partisans intoxicated with the delusion that industry is infallible. A better term might be "giving a shit." Or perhaps "actually doing something." Or better yet, "not pretending corporate reacharounds are effective telecom policy." Can you put a price tag on human life?
Can you ignore the middle east and not think a nuclear device will never be made there for hostile use?
I'm not a fan of war, but I sleep better at night knowing that America is trying to help people and and the same time prevent people of attacking us on our own soil.
Just watch 24 or Gerico for a "Tiny" glimpse of a nuclear event in the US. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... It's not a matter of if, it's when. I'd like the when to be about 100 years from now. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
 ·Verizon FiOS
| said by richardpor:A centralized government plan telecom and own infrastructure fits the definition of Socialism. Call it whatever you like... but back when Ma Bell was alive and well, the communications infrastructure in the USA was the most advanced on the planet. | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by JTRockville:said by richardpor:A centralized government plan telecom and own infrastructure fits the definition of Socialism. Call it whatever you like... but back when Ma Bell was alive and well, the communications infrastructure in the USA was the most advanced on the planet. Not too speak for others.
But you're point fits my comments about private sector vs government.
Ma Bell was a private company. I'm on the fence about the goverment breakup. I think it could have been handled just as well with consumer protection laws. | |
| | | | | | | | | | JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... Ma Bell fits richardpor  's description of socialism (tax payer investment) better than a private company in a free market (private investment).
Infrastructure built by free market/private investment is far inferior to what Ma Bell gave us in her day - FiOS excepted. If all the telecoms were rolling out fiber, I'd have faith that free market/private investment could work. But they're not. | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by JTRockville:Ma Bell fits richardpor 's description of socialism (tax payer investment) better than a private company in a free market (private investment). Infrastructure built by free market/private investment is far inferior to what Ma Bell gave us in her day - FiOS excepted. If all the telecoms were rolling out fiber, I'd have faith that free market/private investment could work. But they're not. There not today, but if Verizon show's success, Qwest and others may follow suit.
Verizon is smart in the fact they are building a 100+ year network going forward.
I will have FiOS in my town by year end if all goes as planned. | |
| | | | | | | | | | JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... That's why I'm not impressed with the free market. With free market (private investment), USA's communications network is far inferior than what people in other countries have. Under the "socialist" (tax payer investment) Ma Bell regime, USA's communications network was far superior than anywhere else.
Private investment (Verizon excepted) is far too late to the game. | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West
1 edit | Re: If you would like to read the actual report ....said by JTRockville:That's why I'm not impressed with the free market. With free market (private investment), USA's communications network is far inferior than what people in other countries have. Under the "socialist" (tax payer investment) Ma Bell regime, USA's communications network was far superior than anywhere else. Private investment (Verizon excepted) is far too late to the game. Define inferior, as the USA is the one who created the Internet and all Tier one backbones are USA founded.
History
The original Internet backbone was the ARPANET. It was replaced by in 1989 by the NSFNet backbone. This was similar to a Tier 1 backbone. The Internet could be defined as anything able to send datagrams to this backbone.
When the Internet went private, a new network architecture based on decentralized routing EGP was developed. The Tier 1 ISPs and the peer connections made the NSFNet redundant and later obsolete. On April 30, 1995, the NSFNet backbone was shut down.
Currently, Tier 1 ISPs form the closest thing to a backbone.
[edit]
List of Tier 1 IPv4 ISPs
The following 10 networks are believed to be the only Tier 1 ISPs:
AOL Transit Data Network (ATDN)/AS1668
AT&T (AS7018)
Global Crossing (GX) (AS3549)
Level 3 (AS3356)
Verizon Business (formerly UUNET) (AS701)
NTT Communications / (formerly Verio) (AS2914)
Qwest (AS209)
SAVVIS (AS3561)
Sprint Nextel Corporation (AS1239)
XO Communications (AS2828)
»www.isoc.org/internet/history/
Not to mention all Tier 1 Routers are almost exclusivly CISCO (US Company)
»www.computerhistory.org/exhibits···history/
Also it was USA who developed the 1st microprocessor (Intel)now used in 80% of all PC's and 18% are AMD(US company)
So your argument holds little water when you look at technology inovation. | |
| | | | | | | | | | JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... Sure, back when we had "socialistic" infrastructure the USA was a leader. But handing it all over to private investors put an end to that. We haven't played a leadership role in infrastructure anytime in the last decade. I'm sure you're not interested, but here are some links to the deterioration of our infrasture under free market conditions - in case you want to bring yourself up to date:
»www.freepress.net/press/release.php?id=86
»www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm···isid=186
»www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0508/
If you're willing to let the free market decide when infrastructure will be built, get used to being mediocre. USA will never be a leader.
I guess it's nice to know that a few US companies aren't falling behind under free market conditions, but I don't think it's worth the hit our infrastructure has taken. | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by JTRockville:Sure, back when we had "socialistic" infrastructure the USA was a leader. But handing it all over to private investors put an end to that. We haven't played a leadership role in infrastructure anytime in the last decade. I'm sure you're not interested, but here are some links to the deterioration of our infrasture under free market conditions - in case you want to bring yourself up to date: » www.freepress.net/press/release.php?id=86» www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm···isid=186» www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0508/If you're willing to let the free market decide when infrastructure will be built, get used to being mediocre. USA will never be a leader. I guess it's nice to know that a few US companies aren't falling behind under free market conditions, but I don't think it's worth the hit our infrastructure has taken. I'm more up too date than anything you can point me too on the web, as I work deploying backbones. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | I agree - however there's also a flip side to that coin...
Many of us pay twice (heavily) for health care we don't use,
and many don't pay for healthcare at all that is heavily used (county).
Supply and demand doesn't always work properly.
There's always a demand for healthcare - many non-residents use it for free, and get better care than those that donate many thousands of dollars/year of their income.
Where's the justice in that ? | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by en102:I agree - however there's also a flip side to that coin... Many of us pay twice (heavily) for health care we don't use, and many don't pay for healthcare at all that is heavily used (county). Supply and demand doesn't always work properly. There's always a demand for healthcare - many non-residents use it for free, and get better care than those that donate many thousands of dollars/year of their income. Where's the justice in that ? That's the problem with Government running a business, as they are politicians with far different interests then a business man.
healthcare is extremely overburdened in North America, by illegal immigrants, etc. I don't have a magic cure, but I can tell you a ER is not the place for people with runny noses. I've had to take family members to ER a dozen times in the last year, for varies bleeding issues, car wrecks, and every time the ER was full of people with colds, flu etc.
Some how there needs more urgent care facilities. I think that Government would do far more help by reducing the TAX burden of Medical facilities than trying to get into the business of medicine themselves.
Cut taxes on Medical facilities with the stipulation of keeping costs down for low income. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... You can hardly call the telecom sector a "free market" since any competitor is NOT allowed to build their own network, due to Public ROW space limitations. Therefore it's more like socialism through a private proxy.
The current system ISN'T working for many people. I'm fine with it. But if they VOTE to have their municipality issue REVENUE bonds to build a public network that private service providers can compete across, well, I think that's one of the best things that can happen. Since REVENUE bonds are only repaid using income from the service they build, no tax-payer who does not use the service will pay a DIME. In fact it will be exactly the same but the locality can benefit from the lower cost of debt afforded tax-free municipal bonds.
I do appreciate the irony of how the rhetoric changed from, "you don't like it? Build your own network!!" to "move out of the country!!". How about if Verizon doesn't like it, they go service another country, how's that sound.. | |
| | | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by Ahrenl:You can hardly call the telecom sector a "free market" since any competitor is NOT allowed to build their own network, due to Public ROW space limitations. Therefore it's more like socialism through a private proxy. ... Not true. Here's a private offering just recently deployed »wifi.google.com/city/mv/apmap.html | |
| | | | | | | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... Yes, now imagine 100 more, to have true competition. You wouldn't be able to see the sky. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |  FiLPremium
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD | "Supply and demand doesn't always work properly.
There's always a demand for healthcare - many non-residents use it for free, and get better care than those that donate many thousands of dollars/year of their income."
WOW!
You make it seem like non-residents get the Mayo Clinic treatment while "residents" get the corner clinic...lol. | |
|
| | | | | | |  nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | said by EnasYorl:My comment was if you're in love with what a foreign country is doing, then move there. One could take the rather limited, "like it or lump it", view of things, or, one could take the view of "I like things here a whole lot, but if we did this, I'd like it even better."
Always remember, if the founding fathers had held your view that "everything's fine here, why change", the US would still be a collection of English colonies.
-tom
--
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -Louis D Brandeis | |
| | | | | | | | | | Well, that is a specious argument. I am going to assume that the person that you were responding to is a citizen of the US. What you might not recognize is that as a part of the benefits of that citizenship, one is allowed to have opinions on economic, political, social...well, just about every subject under the sun, state them, and not have to give up that citizenship, in spite of the fact that some of their fellow citizens might have an infatuation with authoritarian, corporatist groupthink.
It's one of the nicer things about being an American.
Especially when one is not being paid by the word. | |
|
| | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | said by EnasYorl:I firmly believe that it's not the place of government to spend tax dollars on networks, hotels, etc. tax dollars are for 3 main functions in this order. Safety (Military,Fire, Police, etc) Education Roads (Transportation) The rest of the needs can be met by the private sector. Opinions are like assholes... Everyone has them. 
--
Prove it... | |
| | | | | | What about science? NASA? What about health? What about the poor? What about the mentally challenged? What about prisons? What about the EPA? What about the enviroment? What about civil rights?
The government exists to serve the people. There are many things that the government is good at. Sure, there is waste, and corruption, and grafts, but that happens in EVERY company.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. | |
| | | | | | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... Where does future tax monies come from? Educated people running business. If you don't invest in people you have no government, no economy, no capital, etc and become a country like Afghanistan. | |
|
| | | | | The rest of the needs can be met by the private sector.
That's rich.
You must mean, like, the needs of those 12,000 people getting laid off by Alcatel-Lucent? Needs like that?
Half-Assed Objectivism. It's a plague around here. | |
| | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by TScheisskopf:The rest of the needs can be met by the private sector.That's rich. You must mean, like, the needs of those 12,000 people getting laid off by Alcatel-Lucent? Needs like that? Half-Assed Objectivism. It's a plague around here. Lay-offs happen. If the demand for you product drops you cut costs. It's the real world. | |
| | | | | | | | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by EnasYorl:Lay-offs happen. If the demand for you product drops you cut costs. It's the real world. But we both know that far too many mass layoffs have nothing to do with drops in demand. They have everything to do with "Increasing productivity", which means less people do more, or "Increasing shareholder value" which means that the people who hold the preferred stock, like the executives or members of the board, make a bigger pile.
Track some of these layoffs sometime: 6 months to a year down the pike, the executive see huge bonuses. That's blood money.
Alas, some people will never understand a storm until they get hit by a storm. Until then, a storm is simply theory. Academic. Safe. Sterile. | |
|
| | |  LilYodaFeline with squirel personality disorderPremium
join:2004-09-02
Mountains | As long as it's a local government, and people voted for it, why not?
If I follow your logic, if you don't like it, move to an area covered by another local government?
--
"the two most abundant things in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity." (Harlan Ellison) | |
| | | | | EnasYorlThieves World
join:2001-12-02
West | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by LilYoda:As long as it's a local government, and people voted for it, why not? If I follow your logic, if you don't like it, move to an area covered by another local government? The problem is 90% of these projects are NOT voted on by the people. | |
| | | | | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by EnasYorl:The problem is 90% of these projects are NOT voted on by the people. Wow, you've made a statement... Do you have the facts to back that 90% figure up ?
--
Prove it... | |
|
| IanR
join:2001-03-22
Madison, NJ | I can only get the first 5 pages.
The problem I have is that if the body is supposedly independent then the headline should not be the conclusion.
i.e. The headline should be something like "A study on Municipal WiFi" and NOT "Wasteful...Disaster of Municipal WiFi". This may be their conclusion, but the study is not the conclusion and should not be the heading of such a study. Any Study with an emotive headline like this sounds very suspect immediately. | |
| | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by IanR:I can only get the first 5 pages. I just accessed the whole PDF report without problem. What error did you get when trying to go past page 5?
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
| | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| quote:
i.e. The headline should be something like "A study on Municipal WiFi" and NOT "Wasteful...Disaster of Municipal WiFi". This may be their conclusion, but the study is not the conclusion and should not be the heading of such a study. Any Study with an emotive headline like this sounds very suspect immediately.
That's because the conclusion was reached first, obviously. It is public relations, not science, or economics, or independent study -- where a researcher might say have a thesis he then proves or disproves.
These groups are paid to stretch the science to the theory. | |
| | | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
1 edit | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by Karl Bode: quote:
i.e. The headline should be something like "A study on Municipal WiFi" and NOT "Wasteful...Disaster of Municipal WiFi". This may be their conclusion, but the study is not the conclusion and should not be the heading of such a study. Any Study with an emotive headline like this sounds very suspect immediately.
That's because the conclusion was reached first, obviously. Like the Headline on your news item ?:
Verizon Funded Think Tank Skewers Muni-Fi
Pot calling the kettle black???
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: If you would like to read the actual report .... said by Karl Bode:Let's see: Verizon funded? Check. Think tank? Check. Skewering of Wi-Fi? Check. Yes, they also take money from Exxon to skewer global warming science... You've uncovered a vast headline conspiracy.... On the other hand, their report tacks perfectly with Rush, Sean, Bill, Glenn, Laura, Ann, G. Gordon and all those other paragons of unimpeachable objectivity. Hence, it has to be true. | |
|
 Titus PulloI came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26
kudos:1 | Watch the worms squirm.
Typical corporate FUD. All they're missing is a Tony Snow job to mewl their parsed press releases to a captive audience of McConsumers hopped up on Powerboost.
-- | |
| Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
1 edit | Verizon Funded Think Tank ??? What about the dozens of other contributors? The title makes it look like this was a Verizon paid for project. Verizon is only one of many, many groups and individuals giving to the foundation.
In 2003 PRI states that 50% of its income came from foundations, 13% from corporations and the remainder from individuals. [6] It lists foundation and corporate supporters who contributed over $10,000 in the 2003 financial year as:
Corporations
* Altria
* Chevron Texaco
* Cypress Semiconductor
* ExxonMobile Corporation
* Freedom Communications
* Microsoft
* Pfizer
* PhRMA
* SBC
* Verizon
* White House Writers Group
Foundations
* Anschutz Foundation
* Bernard Lee Schwartz Foundation
* Capecchio Foundation
* Center for American Unity
* Charles Koch Foundation
* Chase Foundation of Virginia
* D & DF Foundation
* D & D Foundation
* David and Annette Jorgensen Foundation
* Dean Witter Foundation
* Earhart Foundation
* Farrell Family Foundation
* Girard foundation
* Hugh & Hazel Darling Foundation
* Lilly Endowment
* Lynder and Harry Bradley Foundation
* Milbank Foundation for Rehabilitation
* Philip M. McKenna Foundation
* Ruth & Lovett Peters Foundation
* Sarah Scaife Foundation
* Templeton Foundation
* The Gleason Foundation
* The Hickory Foundation
* The Little River Foundation
* The San Francisco Foundation
* Walton family Foundation
* Weiler Foundation
* William E. Simon Foundation
* William H. Donner Foundation
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
| | | | Re: Verizon Funded Think Tank ??? Yep, and they offer up farmed analysis on demand for all of them.
Keep fighting that good fight TCH. | |
| | | | | Re: Verizon Funded Think Tank ??? I also would like to point out one thing that jumped right off the page:
The Sarah Scaife Foundation.
Controlled by that well-known paragon of peerless objectivity:
Dickey Scaife.
Anyone who has paying even the most cursory of attention to Current Events, over the last 15 years, knows what this portends. | |
| | | | | TCH a.k.a. Retire Rich a.k.a. TK Junkmail posts smartly and uses links and facts to back up his opinions, which is more than you can say for a lot of people around here. Nevertheless, he always comes up short when he tangles with Karl.
Keep up the good work, Karl. | |
| | | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Verizon Funded Think Tank ??? said by steelyken:TCH a.k.a. Retire Rich a.k.a. TK Junkmail posts smartly and uses links and facts to back up his opinions, which is more than you can say for a lot of people around here. Nevertheless, he always comes up short when he tangles with Karl. I guess that depends on what your preconceptions are. Karl definitely has the backing of the P2p'ers and the music thieves that congregate here.
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|
bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Think tanks... Said it before and I'll say it again... "Think tanks" like this operate on an agenda and will work and tweak until the outcome of the research confirms their agenda. It is very rare, in fact you'll probably never see it, that one of these free market "think tanks" will ever come up with any conclusion beside let the market or corporations or their contributors handle it. Same of any other "think tank." "Think tanks" like this are basically data manipulators that attempt to advance the agenda of their contributors.
The proper location for this report is in the trash can. It is worthless. It has not been peer reviewed for errors and it certainly isn't scientifically objective, not by a long shot. So, before any one gets your panties in a knot, realize that people with a clue already know that this report is biased and worthless and would look elsewhere for objective data on municipal WIFI.
--
Prove it... | |
| | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
4 edits | Re: Think tanks... It's advertising and propaganda disguised as science with one goal: confuse the public and protect corporate donor bottom lines from real science, which they long ago deemed a public relations threat. quote:
So, before any one gets your panties in a knot, realize that people with a clue already know that this report is biased and worthless and would look elsewhere for objective data on municipal WIFI.
You'd be surprised on that front. I've seen the PRI's Sonia Arrison write editorials that show up in nationally syndicated articles as objective science without one reference to her financial ties.....
TechNewsWorld also frequently runs her op/eds as well, with just a little link to the PRI and no notification of potential conflict of interest (she writes what her clients want her to write):
»www.ecommercetimes.com/story/9gy···et.xhtml
The fact that intelligent people can't parse out this junk was particularly noticeable over the last decade as PRI's "science" found its way into the global warming debate on Exxon's dime:
»www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfac···hp?id=61 | |
|
| | think tanks reason we gotta have more independent think tanks so that we don't get bias opinons as objective | |
| | tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting
| Re: think tanks said by oreoro :
reason we gotta have more independent think tanks so that we don't get bias opinons as objective
Somebody has to foot the bill to pay for the studies, so only companies/groups that stand to benefit are going to pony up the money. My opinion reading the executive summary is the wording is highly pejorative so I'm sceptical as to objectivity but have not had time to read the entire report.
Hopefully there are enough competing interests willing to invest the resources to determine if conclusions reached are actually based on facts or fabricated. Once "facts" have been vetted we all have our opinion on how to processed. The same set of facts often results in divergent opinion as to the best way forward. That is not all all unusual.
/tom | |
|
| | Argumentum Ad Hominem It seems to me it has been a tactic of the left to dies created the argument not on the merits of facts presented in the argument but on the supposed supports of a think tank or other organizations. We know it been happening on the front of Global Warming, by attacking the Exxon rather that trying to disprove the scientific data presented by the opponents. We are seeing the same here with Muni- Wi-FI. More disgusting is the selective application of this argument, (IE. Astroturfing). If Broadband Reports disaccredit PRI report on Muni WI-FI on the basses Verizon had mad a donation, should it also Net Neutrality should be discredited because the main supporters are multi billion corporation such as Google and EBay. I know it is a fact EBay taken to lobbying congress for Net Neutrality laws. | |
| | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: Argumentum Ad Hominem said by richardpor:It seems to me it has been a tactic of the left to dies created the argument not on the merits of facts presented in the argument but on the supposed supports of a think tank or other organizations. Right and let me guess, the right wingers aren't doing that too ? Please... If you believe that, I have some penny stocks that some guy in an email said will definitely go WAY, WAY up tomorrow... 
--
Prove it... | |
|
| | Muni fi Slight OT but their was an article about the much disputed Philadelphia Muni-Fi »philly.metro.us/metro/local/arti···217.html their was another article about it in print yesterday but cant seem to find it online today. | |
|
| |
|
|
