Broadband funding in stimulus plan sparks debate

[swampy]

CB..."Hence our overall infrastructure is in collapse. I personally think much of the infrastructure should be massively re-regulated and nationalized. After all, our tax dollars made the initial investment. Deregulation has been very, very, very bad for the US."

I'm still on a rural electric Co-op that was a product of the New Deal. It was privatized in the 40's and is owned by it's users. I have a piece of the pie and even get to vote on board memebers! How great is that? Great service, excellent upgrades in equipment and services. I couldn't be happier.

As far as the internet goes, our tax dollars may have made the initial investment (the original military/university systems), but again, it took private enterprise to expand, upgrade, and install services. I don't want any more government control of the internet than what we have now and that's what you will get if the government gets it's nose in the tent. I'm out here in the boonies, but high speed internet service is avaliable to anyone who wants it. Hughes Net (private enterprise) will gladly set you up. You'll pay for it, but that's the great American way.

[wave rider]

Swampy is right on one thing, "Hughes Net (private enterprise) will gladly set you up. You'll pay for it, but that's the great American way."

And they will take exorbitant fees each month for extremely poor/limited service. At least that is my experience...

I'd rather see the government invest in the infrastructure and then lease it to the providers. That is providers plural.

Our current system generally has one owner of the cabling who is also in the business of selling access and reluctant to lease bandwidth to independent ISPs who might be their competitors. Remember a few years ago when there were many DSL providers to choose from? Now the number of independents have dwindled since the telecoms gave the independents (and thus the independents' customers) bad service. Aren't most areas pretty much limited to telecoms, cable TV providers, and satellite these days?

I've heard that some of the European countries have government owned infrastructure leased to multiple competing ISPs in each market area which brings down the price and raises the level of service for everyone.

=wr=

[Black]

swampy wrote:
I don't want any more government control of the internet than what we have now and that's what you will get if the government gets it's nose in the tent.

:agree:

However, I think to assume the government doesn't already have as much control over the internet as it wants may be naive.

[Mac1337]

cbelt3 wrote:

Gray- Yes. think Rural Electrification act, that was part of FDR's New Deal, which was the stimulus package of the Great Depression I.

Democrats haven't had one new idea since FDR. They keep going back to that well again and again; roads and bridges and dams and railroads. This is 2009. The country is explored and developed. We don't need more roads. Give me coast to coast rail and I might be interested.

[graylocks]

Dakota wrote:
Democrats haven't had one new idea since FDR. They keep going back to that well again and again; roads and bridges and dams and railroads. This is 2009. The country is explored and developed. We don't need more roads. Give me coast to coast rail and I might be interested.

given the American love affair with cars, flexibility, and freedom i think extensive rail development is a very hard sell. i can just imagine the outcries of "What? The government is going to make me give up my car?!?"

yes, rail makes better ecological sense but we are way too selfish.

[Rolando]

Dakota wrote:
Democrats haven't had one new idea since FDR. They keep going back to that well again and again; roads and bridges and dams and railroads. This is 2009. The country is explored and developed. We don't need more roads. Give me coast to coast rail and I might be interested.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a pretty good Idea.
CAFE was a pretty good idea.

The last new Idea the Republicans had was the "Southern Strategy"
Reagan and co just recycled Hoover and Coolidge.

[Black]

Dakota wrote:
[quote=cbelt3]

Gray- Yes. think Rural Electrification act, that was part of FDR's New Deal, which was the stimulus package of the Great Depression I.

Democrats haven't had one new idea since FDR. They keep going back to that well again and again; roads and bridges and dams and railroads. This is 2009. The country is explored and developed. We don't need more roads. Give me coast to coast rail and I might be interested.
It's amusing that you think democrats are pro-road and republicans are pro-rail.

[deckeda]

As a country we are rapidly coming to a point where good Internet service is considered part of the infrastructure like the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System. Of course, there are plenty of folks who think that could have been put together by private enterprise alone. Possibly, but it's not the kind of thing private enterprise excels at. And the Republican president it's still named after apparently agreed.

Me? At home I'm without Internet service for the next week while my ISP (ATT) "gets around" to stopping by and re-connecting it because I ported over my landline to a competitor. So far, THAT'S the American Way.

Bottom line for me is that I can certainly live w/o the Internet at home for a week. It's merely an inconvenience. But ask me in a few years if I still feel that way, when new services and dependencies come onboard that require it.

[Mac1337]

deckeda wrote:
As a country we are rapidly coming to a point where good Internet service is considered part of the infrastructure like the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System.

What year is this? 1995? Is digital divide reappearing? If somebody read your post he would think we are a country of 28.8K dial ups. I don't know a single person who is not on broadband. And they are of the most modest means. Oh sure, you can find some one living in a shack in Montana somewhere but there are people still with black and white TV too.

For you to complain about the ATT service and then wistfully long for government service borders on insanity.

[Spock]

15th place in the world wide internet access league is not good enough. Some things are too important to the country as a whole to leave to private industry alone.

Why Government Investment Is Justified Now

The value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of endpoints. Even if you are already connected, you gain by having the network you are connected to become universal.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/112991-b...tified-now

Its an interesting read.