Obama Will Spend $6 Billion On Broadband

Just makes me laugh at the opening line in the article "The economy is in a crisis not seen since the Great Depression."

Gee what about the crisis in early years of 2000-2001, Or early years 1991-1992 and lets not forget the really bad crisis when Jimmy Carter was in charge. With that era we had 20% plus interest rates and unemployment rate that was at 10% or better.

So tired of only way we can get things back on track is to have the government spend us into a bottomless hole. When majority of the problems were having now is because of our government.

Where does all the money for these projects and plans come from? Does the government just cut themselves a check?

Bank of America just said they need Billions to buy Merrill Lynch.....go figure

Heh.

It's the same line, just used on succeeding generations of clueless youngsters (and forgetful adults) to garner support.

Remember the 1991-92 recession? "Worst economy in 50 years."

Yes they just cut a check and we (the taxpayers of the US) will foot the bill at some point

just tak it on to the 6+Trillion they've squandered so far

They will steal it from us either through tax increases, borrowing from China or simply printing more.

LOL
didn't we just bail Lynch out? and they spend it allready?

(I need $5Trillion so I can um I don't know buy Comcast or something)j/k

Don't worry. We'll save plenty because Obama has indicated he'll close Club Gitmo and he wants to keep Osama Bin Laden "in a cave somewhere" if he can't capture or kill him. Though I do remember Obama criticizing Bush for not doing enough to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden... maybe my memory is fuzzy.

»www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28624679/

»www.cbsnews.com/stories/ ··· 85.shtml

I suppose Obama could use the money that his future Secretary of Treasury paid in back taxes and interest to pay for this too.

I agree that spending isn't the answer to our problems (more like the cause of it), but then you go out to blame Carter for bad interest rates in the 80s? I don't think you understand how the economy works. The interest rate level was set to control inflation and the unemployment was due to recession in the 70s due to Vietnam spending and the oil crisis.

I know lol. Um Mr. Obama, I need 4T so I can um... buy comcast and make them um... be everywhere on earth../lol.

Project Mayhem seems like a better idea every day.

So who is getting this 6 billion? Is this going to prop up local fiber ISP's? Or just the big ISP's are going to be getting this..and probably wasting it away..

If they do manage to "piss off very powerful incumbent ISP lobbyists" then you KNOW they are doing something right!

Here is a summary I put together by excerpting parts of the US News & World Report story. It shows all the major expenditures:
»tkjunkmail.blogspot.com/ ··· 825.html

It doesn't work like that. Every dollar that is printed is one more in circulation and thus each is worth less. Printing trillion dollar bills doesn't work. It has to come from China or all of us willing tax payers >.>

I am not sure why this isnt discussed more, but any sort of national broadband "plan" will only hurt the consumers. Let me outline why, in four simple steps.

1) Government says to all cable co's and telco's that they need to serve X% of the population within X years.

2) Said companies realize this will cost them billions, so they lobby and sue to prevent it.

3) Overbearing government forces the issue, and the providers spend billions against their will.

4) Providers now serve many more people, however they pass on the cost of expansion to you and I (in rate increases, etc.)

The above will never work, and will only cause big problems and increase costs for everyone. NOW here's my solution. Instead of forcing the incumbent providers to do anything, the government should take that $6 billion and offer it as incentives to competitive providers (hear that CLEC's?) who promise to (get ready for it...) build their own network! To begin with, this would actually give CLEC's some viability, and put the "resale mafia" out of business. CLEC's that actually have a solid business plan would have access to millions of dollars to put actual infrastructure in the ground. This would in turn create competition, which provide for lower rates to consumers. It would also have the side effect of creating many more jobs for the newly expanded CLEC's and regional providers that step up to the plate.

Before the spend a dime they need a detailed map of areas that can and can't get broadband and the speeds that are available.

all I have to say about all this is

BOHICA

Having been through the last two, I'd say this is quite different. I can't speak for the late 70's, but I can theorize that IF the Government wasn't bailing out the banks and lubricating the credit markets and we were concerned with trying to balance the budget the the moment I think 20% interest rates would be in effect now as well!

Also, in the 70's, there was still the reassurance that the USA was the biggest strongest economy in the world, that we had major blue collar job strengths and that things would turn around.... I'm not so sure Americans are nearly as confident these days due to our enormous debt load and exporting of jobs, combined with the strength of countries like China and the European Union.

While I do believe we'll sauced in "bailing" ourselves out of the current crisis, the writing is on the wall: We simply cannot go on as we have done borrowing and spending more then we have.

Well, if they only want $6 billion for a nationwide broadband plan, then they aren't planning on doing much. One thing that the media (including Broadband Reports) needs to focus on, and it should go hand-in-hand with any "nationwide" broadband plan, is a nationwide Internet security plan. It bothers me that we're allowing important, if not critical, utility and other public infrastructures to move to a platform (Internet) that is very vulnerable to remote attack. Much needs to be done to make it more secure before we wake up and find ourselves completely vulnerable to remote foreign attack. And if you think it's not a real world concern, here's a link to an article you should ponder; it's about the possible role of the Chinese army hacking into public utilities via the Internet in a major power outage that occurred in the eastern US and Canada several years ago. »www.nationaljournal.com/ ··· 6948.php

And another article that's food for thought about moving so much of the infrastructure of our commercial and public sectors to the net. . »www.securecomputing.net. ··· cks.aspx

»www.urbandictionary.com/ ··· .H.I.C.A

Due to my extreme lack of faith in the federal government to provide any form of consumer protection or legitimate enforcement since every single congressman / congresswoman seems to be out to get there's - and it's not exactly as if the FCC has shown itself to be the shining knight, especially after their enforcement over Comcast, or rather lack thereof. So you'll understand if I take this announcement and don't believe that it will help me see anything other than Comcast in my neighborhood for the next 5 years, or Verizon... if they ever build out, because you know, those darn incumbent Cable areas just aren't profitable... Never mind that 50-70% of the homes here have a satellite dish on top of their roof's for either DirecTV or Dish Network. Nope... no chance of profitability there. Only about a hundred or so households willing to switch to any form of competition at the drop of a hat.

Oh yes, he clearly meant that he wants bin laden to stay hiding in a cave forever.
Ya, like that statement was not a spin.

By the way, his treasury pick already took care of that and paid all the standard penalty fees. Was it a mistake? was it on purpose? That I do not know.

I'm willing to bet you it can work. It worked in Japan, after all.

I'm willing to say that if there was a stronger push for municipal fiber optic services, especially ones like were just seen in Louisiana, it would drive down cost greatly. Now if only we could get those congressman to actually do something right instead of listening to lobbyist for the telco's, throwing money at them, and hoping for the best.

How about that nice $250 billion that magically disappeared...

If you read the linked interview you will see it is a direct quotation.Of course. I am sure every other US taxpayer who made "honest mistakes" on their taxes got the same kind of sweetheart deal too.

Sorry, but if you're going to be running Treasury and are either too incompetent to manage your own finances correctly and ensure taxes are paid (especially when there are so many ways to get professional help to do it), or you are cheating on your taxes, then you need to find a different job.

Considering that the current guy running Treasury isn't exactly doing a good job at the moment, I think we'd be better served having someone who knows what they are doing running that department.

Spending any taxpayer money so contractor-hired illegal immigrants can work 16/7 digging trenches in the ground seems like a stupid way to stimulate the economy.

Municipalities have no business building and managing broadband networks. Doing so will only result in additional taxes on the residents, which is what we are trying to avoid. My proposal is based around giving actual businesses (with verified business plans) some of the money that was previously set aside for broadband deployment. This way if the business fails, at least there was only one handout from the government (which at the end of the day is our money anyway). My proposal will create thousands of local jobs, and brings millions of dollars into local economies. Giving more money to local municipalities is like pissing away the cash. I wouldnt be opposed if the government put conditions on the loan that prevented the LEC's from getting it either. Find a CLEC with a real business plan and take away all their excuses for being not being successful in the market. THAT's what we need, not more handouts.

See my comments below. I would have no problems if conditions were attached so that only smaller providers got money to build actual networks. This would (hopefully) quickly usher out the era of UNE-P madness that has ruined our telecom sector since 1996.

To recap, the benefits are:
- put the "resale mafia" out of business
- create competition
- lower rates to consumers
- more jobs and regional business creation

I LOVE IT -- except that each one has to tear up my cul-de-sac and flowerbeds, and I'd expect more red-lines than an Advanced English Composition exam.

So, instead of tearing up the roads and yards 14 times to create 14 new choices, how about creating co-op last-mile fiber networks and letting these 14 choices provide services on it? Same goals, same results, less hassle, and less start-up costs to incoming competitors?