Yay maybe people will start learning elsewhere that giant corporations' best interests aren't their customers.
I'm surprised certain groups haven't started labeling/marketing this as socialism.
Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
211–220 of 230 posts
Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
Federal absurd regulations are commie-scandalous while lobby absurd regulation are just fine ? It's always the same. People don't see, don't control, when they try, resistance is so high they will cave before change occurs.
> Federal absurd regulations are commie-scandalous while lobby absurd regulation are just fine ? Laissez fair would generally say all regulations are bad. Regulations that help monopolies are one of the main reasons free market advocates are againt regulations. All regulations start with "good intentions". Comcast and phone companies are great examples of monopolies that are protected by the State, not failures of fr…
You're right and that part of the point. State or Market is not the factor here. This old opposition is a false dichotomy / semantic slip. Control/Opacity are more important.
Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
#213I don't understand why there is no competition. There must be other people wanting to trying their hand at starting a fibre ISP. Yeah it's expensive, but if there is money to be made there should be people willing to invest. Is there something else preventing competition in the US?
There is no money to be made.
You won't be able to build a network in more than a few cities at first because anything else would cost astronomical amounts of money.
That means that the current monopolist in those cities can afford to lower prices, making your investment unprofitable.
Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the same time, without those requirements, only the most profitable (read: rich) neighborhoods would be cherry picked, leaving the rest of us without service. That would make the digital divide even bigger, widening the gap between rich and poor.
> without those requirements, only the most profitable (read: rich) neighborhoods would be cherry picked Isn't that how everything works, that goods and services are bought by those who can pay for them? Isn't that what having money means? Isn't that why people strive to earn money?
"Isn't that how everything works"...?
No, that isn't how everything works. Sometimes we forego the financial means of individuals and create things that would not otherwise emerge. Both the US telephony and US electrical systems were built out to include the vast bulk of residences in the US regardless of the means of individuals to fund that small part of the system they privately benefited from. Many of the "capitalists" of the time understood that the net value of this enterprise was strongly positive despite the subsidy gifted to those who had not paid all of their part.
Universality has value. It is difficult to calculate that value; simple ledgers and simple views of economics do not suffice. It is looong past time that we set aside the simple, failed model we have endured and solve this problem. That is what these municipalities, in their disparate, halting and often flawed ways, are trying to do.
Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
#215F u comcast.
Sorry had to let it out.
Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
#216Government running commercial enterprises. Now that's a recipe for success! http://munibroadbandfailures.com/
You should avoid citing that page; it's not credible. A specific instance that I know of is Sebewaing Light and Power in Michigan. They built out a publicly owned fiber network that now has over 500 of 1700 residents as customers as of June and will break even in 2018, earlier than expected, whereas your site claims there are only 150 customers. That site was created by Taxpayers Protection Alliance which a Koch fron…
"That site was created by Taxpayers Protection Alliance which a Koch front group."
So what? Ad hominem fallacy?
When the municipal broadbands fail taxpayers are on the hook for million dollars bail outs. https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickgleason/2014/09/30/munic...
Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
#217Government running commercial enterprises. Now that's a recipe for success! http://munibroadbandfailures.com/
I think we could make a map of “private broadband failures” that funneled hundreds of millions of public dollars to private enterprises to bring broadband infrastructure to millions of Americans and was never delivered.
As opposed to what? Billion dollars of taxpayer bail out because government have no incentive and have no idea how to run a commercial enterprise efficiently. If a private company fails on its obligation you can sue. If public company fail not only can't you sure but you have to pay more taxes to bail it out.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickgleason/2014/09/30/munic...
Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What is the value of that? Wouldn't that be effectively privatizing the gains and socializing the cost? No, it would be having the government provide the infrastructure that we only need one of (fiber to individual homes), while encouraging competition among service providers, rather than stagnation with a single monopoly.
What extra value would those service providers provide? I assume here that the service level would be Gbit internet with service levels as high as electricity, which is also a utility monopoly at least here in SF.
Just like roads don't get you from A to B, cars do using those roads, cables don't transfer your internet traffic from your house to the website you're trying to reach, ISPs do using those cables.
Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
#219I love to see cities exert their power. In some ways we’ve acquiesced to a powerful central government, whether it be federal or state, but its local governments that should be powerful. After all, they have the best handle on the needs and desires of their citizens.
I think the better way to state it is flipped around:
Citizens have a more direct effect on local governments than they do state or federal.
Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado
#220Keep your powder dry, Coloradians. COMCAST is like some non-giving up cable guy who simply won't let citizens determine their own fate when there is oodles of money to be made from them instead. Prepare for them to come back through the rear door, bribing the legislature and congress to enact laws that restrict the practice just approved.
> non-giving up cable guy
gotta admire a great Simpsons reference when I see one