Earlier quoted context omitted.
"All starting from the unwarranted assumption that telephone access was necessary to farmers and food prices would have risen dramatically." Yeah, that initial assumption really is weird. How much could a phone line like that possibly cost for a company who does phone lines? I have no idea, maybe 10 million for all I know. But that's a one-time cost that will be spread out over all the crops that farm produces for th…
Some googling around gets me a cost of $120,000/mile to install overhead telephone wire. So, for example, if you have a tiny town of 200 people that's 15 miles away from anywhere, running a phone line out to it will cost $9,000 per resident. Which sounds steep, but possible to self-fund. On the other hand, if you have one guy on a farm two miles away from the next nearest neighbor, well, adding a phone line costs as…
Phone lines, or roads, or fire brigades, or police. Or tax collectors…
I suspect most farmers would choose to fund their own telecommunication, if it meant they didn't have to pay tax.
I'm not quite sure where the line gets drawn about what's reasonable to "expect" the government to provide in return for your tax dollars, and quite how to ensure "fairness" or equality between city-dwellers and rural taxpayers. But deep down I'm a bit of a socialist - I think phones should probably be owned by "the government", or at least regulated so heavily that the decisions about who does and doesn't get phone service is largely driven by ethics and "the greater good" than by "increasing shareholder value".