Broadband funding in stimulus plan sparks debate

[graylocks]

i'm interested in some thoughts, debate, on this also though not really on whether it belongs in this particular stimulus plan. i'm always reading how US broadband is so much slower than in many similarly technologically advanced nations. do you think we should therefore upgrade our broadband networks to stay competitive and is this the responsibility of the government or private industry?

Broadband funding in stimulus plan sparks debate

WASHINGTON (AP) - Among the economic stimulus proposals moving through Congress is one that fulfills an old dream of broadband boosters. It would offer substantial funding for high-speed Internet networks in corners of the country that still rely on dial-up connections or have only one broadband option.

[$tevie]

I thought the point of all these things was to create jobs. It's about the means as much, or even more, than the end. At least, that's how I understood it.

If the government is going to create jobs, then I think it makes sense to create jobs with results that people will benefit from -- like better internet access, for example, or safer bridges or better schools.

On a slight tangent from the original point of this thread, I think the GOP is trying to nitpick this bill to death ONLY to make Obama look bad. They are declaring war in a slimy, sneaky way that proves that even though they no longer control Congress, they intend to see to it that the bitter, partisan divisions they nurtured while they did will never die.

[cbelt3]

$tevie- alas, the bitter partisan debate is also on the other foot. The fact that the democratic party did not even talk to their loyal opposition during the development of this bill guaranteed this kind of response. Both parties are up to their old tricks. It's weenie waving at its worst, and we're all going to lose as a result.

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

The base problem is that all of the industries that benefited from the new deal's infrastructure rich projects have just cashed the checks without reinvesting. The telephone system was also distributed rurally by dint of law (and federal funding). No such law applies to broadband- you can thank 'de-regulation'.

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.

[graylocks]

cbelt3 wrote:
The base problem is that all of the industries that benefited from the new deal's infrastructure rich projects have just cashed the checks without reinvesting. The telephone system was also distributed rurally by dint of law (and federal funding). No such law applies to broadband- you can thank 'de-regulation'.

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.

how is that different from Socialism? i'm not asking to be snarky, at all. it seems whenever people talk about government regulation on a large scale, it brings the pinkoo commies zombies out of the woodwork. since i'm fuzzy on the distinctions between the economic systems, i then get mentally stuck.

[Black]

cbelt3 wrote:
$tevie- alas, the bitter partisan debate is also on the other foot. The fact that the democratic party did not even talk to their loyal opposition during the development of this bill guaranteed this kind of response. Both parties are up to their old tricks. It's weenie waving at its worst, and we're all going to lose as a result.

The democratic party developed this bill?

I agree that the republicans would like to see the entire country standing in soup lines wearing barrels if it would reflect badly on Obama.

[OWC Jamie]

I agree that the democrats would like to see the entire country standing in soup lines wearing barrels if it would reflect nicely on Obama.

[mattkime]

>>how is that different from Socialism?

Its only socialism when someone else does it.

[Silencio]

mattkime wrote:
>>how is that different from Socialism?

Its only socialism when someone else does it.

More like, it's only socialism when it benefits someone else.

[Black]

I apologize and accept full responsibility for my role in dragging this thread into inane one-liner territory so early in its life.

[Silencio]

Black wrote:
I apologize and accept full responsibility for my role in dragging this thread into inane one-liner territory so early in its life.

Hey! That too was only one line. If you want to raise the level of discourse around here I recommend you take on a more verbose style of prose.
:oldfogey: