Low Cost, High Speed...

[Chizzang]

There are certain services that 1) are important enough to not require a profit, and/or 2) are so expensive from a build out standpoint, or low in profit margin to smaller populations that the "free market" will fall short in providing. The providers haven't paid to prevent deregulation, they've paid to enshrine monopolies, the prevention of which is one of the most crucial tasks of our government.

Conservatives used to (and a few of the more reasoned ones still do) recognize the need for government to play a roll in supporting the commons. High speed, low cost internet similar to roads, bridges, and the public airwaves is certainly a crucial resource that positively affects the entire country.

Certain cities have decided to do this through a democratic process. They deem it important enough. Who are you, Comcast, the state, or the feds to tell them they can't?

You're normally a well thought out moderate, Captain Brown, but I'm afraid you've downed a gallon of Randian bat **** crazy flavored neo-liberal Kool-Aid here.

BTW, reaganomics deregulation is what **** a lot of these fly over towns to begin with.

High speed Internet isn't healthcare. It certainly isn't a right..

When the US Tax payer has built the infrastructure it absolutely IS A RIGHT
If Comcast paid for it all by themselves then sure - they win
but they DID NOT PAY FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE

Americans OWN the high speed infrastructure NOT Comcast and Time Warner

This ^ is the beginning of any conversation about high speed internet...

[Ivytalk]

Until I read this thread, I was starting to like Rubio. It's gone from this to this in a few posts.

[CAA Flagship]

High speed Internet isn't healthcare. It certainly isn't a right..

When the US Tax payer has built the infrastructure it absolutely IS A RIGHT
If Comcast paid for it all by themselves then sure - they win
but they DID NOT PAY FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE

Americans OWN the high speed infrastructure NOT Comcast and Time Warner

This ^ is the beginning of any conversation about high speed internet...

And the ending of that very conversation has to do with higher taxes (a.k.a. government bailout) for the failing of municipalities to run the program effectively.

[BDKJMU]

[Grizalltheway]

When the US Tax payer has built the infrastructure it absolutely IS A RIGHT
If Comcast paid for it all by themselves then sure - they win
but they DID NOT PAY FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE

Americans OWN the high speed infrastructure NOT Comcast and Time Warner

This ^ is the beginning of any conversation about high speed internet...

And the ending of that very conversation has to do with higher taxes (a.k.a. government bailout) for the failing of municipalities to run the program effectively.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/ ... /21765287/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chizzang]

When the US Tax payer has built the infrastructure it absolutely IS A RIGHT
If Comcast paid for it all by themselves then sure - they win
but they DID NOT PAY FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE

Americans OWN the high speed infrastructure NOT Comcast and Time Warner

This ^ is the beginning of any conversation about high speed internet...

And the ending of that very conversation has to do with higher taxes (a.k.a. government bailout) for the failing of municipalities to run the program effectively.

How much of our tax dollars do you think go directly to Comcast and Time Warner every year..?
Take a guess - actually its easy to find
But just for starters $200 billion since 1995



I grew up as an employee in the Broadband Build Out days...
The American Public has been cheated
Oh I get it - you work for a defense contractor so ENDLESS MONEY pouring in from the Public is the norm
But seriously did we get what we paid for - because we PAID FOR IT BIG TIME

[Grizalltheway]

And the ending of that very conversation has to do with higher taxes (a.k.a. government bailout) for the failing of municipalities to run the program effectively.

you work

[Chizzang]

you work

You want to see the Republican Congress and Senate kick into action..?
Watch how they rally up and UNITE against Google
As Google attempts to build their own internet infrastructure in selected cities

States Rights my ass - watch this unfold
Republicans will throw states rights out the window so fast your head will spin

[CID1990]

The ironic thing is that Rubio right now has much more power to affect this than he would if he was in the White House.

[dbackjon]

This is all I seem to be able to come up with on this thread...

Perfectly describes today's business welfare environment.

[dbackjon]

Until I read this thread, I was starting to like Rubio. It's gone from this to this in a few posts.

And his statement wanting to only appoint Justices that will overturn Gay Marriage?

[dbackjon]

When the US Tax payer has built the infrastructure it absolutely IS A RIGHT
If Comcast paid for it all by themselves then sure - they win
but they DID NOT PAY FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE

Americans OWN the high speed infrastructure NOT Comcast and Time Warner

This ^ is the beginning of any conversation about high speed internet...

And the ending of that very conversation has to do with higher taxes (a.k.a. government bailout) for the failing of municipalities to run the program effectively.

Can you point to any?

This would be an interesting exercise - bailouts of public utilities vs bailouts of private utilities.


There are some services that MOST (always the exception to the rule) do better than for-profit enterprises. In Arizona, our gas company is private and does a good job. We have two main electrical companies - a governmental entity and a for profit company. The governmental entity is cheaper, and much less wasteful than the for profit company.

Taxpayers have had to bail out many private water companies. Same with a private fire company.

[dbackjon]

The ironic thing is that Rubio right now has much more power to affect this than he would if he was in the White House.

That would require him to actually show up to the Senate.

[CAA Flagship]

And the ending of that very conversation has to do with higher taxes (a.k.a. government bailout) for the failing of municipalities to run the program effectively.

Can you point to any?

This would be an interesting exercise - bailouts of public utilities vs bailouts of private utilities.


There are some services that MOST (always the exception to the rule) do better than for-profit enterprises. In Arizona, our gas company is private and does a good job. We have two main electrical companies - a governmental entity and a for profit company. The governmental entity is cheaper, and much less wasteful than the for profit company.

Taxpayers have had to bail out many private water companies. Same with a private fire company.

Bailouts of government ineffectiveness is never a "bailout". It is "increased taxes". Since taxes are increased all the time, it is difficult to pinpoint where the "bailout" is.

I'm not against municipal broadband. I'm against a lack of competition. If the municipality is the sole provider, that won't solve the problem. And once you go outside the taxing district, it will become a cluster. The city of Newport News, VA operates the water service for the residents. They also provide water outside the taxing boundary of the city. Their largest single customer is located outside the city limits. The water cost is very high, and 1 million dollars a year of profit is dumped back to city's coffers. The customers outside of the city limits do not benefit from that dumpback.

The best way to handle this is likely a public-private partnership. Shareholders are more effective at motivating businesses to be fiscally accountable than taxpayers.

[SDHornet]

Not really. Oh and I’m guessing those local government setups probably had to contract out to some of those vile and evil internet providers for consulting services anyways. We all know government at every level is largely incompetent (the incompetence increases as you go up in jurisdiction)…and I am thoroughly entertained that the small government folks (obviously not you kalm) are jumping on board with the idea of government being competent enough to own, manage, and maintain its own internet network.

Newsflash morons: government at all levels already has no idea how to manage and maintain the services it already is responsible for (roads, water/wastewater infrastructure, social services). I know because I am making a living off if its incompetence and mismanagement. You’d be amazed at some of the shit I see for the simplest of infrastructure systems…and yet people think the gov should own and operate their local internet networks.

Oh there's a certain degree of truth to this and it's really an old debate:

COSTLY AND DANGEROUS
In response, and recognizing that cheap, plentiful electricity was essential to economic development and quality of life, thousands of communities formed electric utilities of their own. Predictably, the private utilities claimed that public ownership of electrical utilities was “costly and dangerous” and “always a failure,” according to the November 1906 issue of Moody’s Magazine. Now more than 2,000 communities in the U.S., including Seattle, San Antonio and Los Angeles, provide their own electricity.

Today, the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, which advocates for community broadband initiatives, is tracking more than 60 municipal governments that have built or are building successful fiber networks, just as they created electric systems during the 20th century. In Chattanooga, Tennessee, for example, the city’s publicly owned electric company provides fast, affordable and reliable fiber Internet access. Some businesses based in Knoxville -- 100 miles to the northeast -- are adding jobs in Chattanooga, where connectivity can cost an eighth as much.

Meanwhile, less than 8 percent of Americans currently receive fiber service to their homes, compared with more than 50 percent of households in South Korea, and almost 40 percent in Japan. Where it’s available, Americans pay five or six times as much for their fiber access as people in other countries do. Fully a third of Americans don’t subscribe to high-speed Internet access at all, and AT&T Chief Executive Officer Randall Stephenson said last month that the company was “trying to find a broadband solution that was economically viable to get out to rural America, and we’re not finding one, to be quite candid.” America is rapidly losing the global race for high-speed connectivity.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2 ... n-crawford" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As it currently stands, at least some municipal owned wi-fi is providing faster, cheaper internet. Compared to other countries, government owned systems are also better at providing it to a greater number of people at less cost. That might not always be the case and I get the concerns over government inefficiencies, but it's none of Marco Rubio's damn fucking business whether Chattanooga as a city decides to offer it.

He cares, because he's paid to care. He's a politician.

This coming from a guy who digs the government cradle to grave mentality.

[SDHornet]

Until I read this thread, I was starting to like Rubio. It's gone from this to this in a few posts.

Racist.

[SDHornet]

You want to see the Republican Congress and Senate kick into action..?
Watch how they rally up and UNITE against Google
As Google attempts to build their own internet infrastructure in selected cities

States Rights my ass - watch this unfold
Republicans will throw states rights out the window so fast your head will spin

[SDHornet]

The ironic thing is that Rubio right now has much more power to affect this than he would if he was in the White House.

Naw...phone and a pen bro...phone and a mutherfucking pen.

[SDHornet]

The ironic thing is that Rubio right now has much more power to affect this than he would if he was in the White House.

That would require him to actually show up to the Senate.

Just another page from the Obama playbook...or should I say "present"...

[BDKJMU]

I had no idea Rubio's smokin hot 40 yr old wife (I think was 38 in this pic) is a former Dolphins cheerleader...

[JohnStOnge]

What?

[Ivytalk]

Until I read this thread, I was starting to like Rubio. It's gone from this to this in a few posts.

Racist.

It may get back to , Hermano. Now stop those silly "racist" posts or I'll sic my Harvard homie Ruben Navarrette on you.

[Ivytalk]

Until I read this thread, I was starting to like Rubio. It's gone from this to this in a few posts.

And his statement wanting to only appoint Justices that will overturn Gay Marriage?

Must have missed that one.

[SDHornet]

Racist.

It may get back to , Hermano. Now stop those silly "racist" posts or I'll sic my Harvard homie Ruben Navarrette on you.

That's more like it. Navarrette use to write columns for the San Diego Union Tribune...I always felt meh to his articles. Haven't read any of his stuff in almost a decade.

[CID1990]

The ironic thing is that Rubio right now has much more power to affect this than he would if he was in the White House.

That would require him to actually show up to the Senate.

Anyone who voted for the current pogue has ZERO place to criticize a senator for not showing up