said by 2farfromCO7 :

---

No, governments will never be as efficient as cutthroat competitive companies that face stiff competition and worry about it every day.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

said by morbo :

---

straight from the horse's mouth? lol. you might as well say "because i say so". the link you gave me is from an organization dedicated to anti-castro propaganda.

---

Well if Castro was such a good guy, and if Cuba's healthcare system really was that great, why are so many Cubans trying to leave?

---

said by JakCrow :

---

You misunderstand: I have no problem with a capitalist society.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

I have a problem with the die hard free marketeers that want deregulation no matter how many people have to be stepped on get it (usually the individual consumer).

---

said by JakCrow :

---

I'm also tired of deregulation that comes about because the industry wants to make more money, or large customers of said industry want to spend less, and damn anyone that gets in the way, while yet again, the individual is left out of the equation but has the most to loose.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

And if a government run program is failing, it's up to the people to vote the ones out responsible.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

Would you be happy if the bells killed WISP competition? I know I wouldn't.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

Stuff like this is more like pennies on the dollar, not half the bill, and that implies no basic user fees.

---

said by morbo :

---

straight from the horse's mouth? lol. you might as well say "because i say so". the link you gave me is from an organization dedicated to anti-castro propaganda.

---

said by ravital :

---

Government is a monopoly? Let me see, cable franchises win 10-year contracts with no one moving in on their turf, ant that's called competition.

---

said by ravital :

---

Government needs your vote every 2-4 years depending on the area and the office, and that's a monopoly?

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

you make it sound like dsl is in the bill of rights.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

said by 2farfromCO7 :

---

ALL MONOPOLIES ARE EVIL.

---

Government is a monopoly, is it evil too?

---

said by pnh102 :

---

I understand and sympathize... I can't bear to imagine the kind of socialist paradise that Feinstein and Boxer help to create. But this goes back to my earlier point. Elected officials will stay in power by basically granting a majority of the constituents freebies from the treasury, no matter how ineptly or inefficiently they are run. This fact alone creates the kind of obstacles you face in throwing these bums out.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

It wasn't for my lack of trying. I'm still trying to get Tauscher, Feinstein, and Boxer out of Congress. Snooty cows.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

That's why we have elections to vote abusers out if we so choose.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

So why did the legislators cave into the power companies? The legislators in other states aren't giving into the demands of SBC when it comes to deregulation. As elected officials, the legislators have a moral duty to prevent these kinds of screwups.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

But that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If this scheme made Enron and other companies so rich, why wasn't it done on a national basis?

---

said by pnh102 :

---

Damn right, I am a Yankee-imperialist capitalist pig and damn proud of it. :)

---

said by pnh102 :

---

This freedom includes the right for companies to make stupid decisions like was the case with PG&E and SCE.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

But this begs my original question, why didn't California's legislators think before they passed this law?

---

said by pnh102 :

---

Certianly legislators in other states see the problems with giving SBC what amounts to a "blank check." California's legislature should have had some foresight. You can't sell something for less than what it costs and you don't need to be brain surgeon to realize that.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

Its perfectly fine for private companies to take risks like these because they're the ones who will go under as a result, provided that the government doesn't step in to "save the day." However, if a government does this, taxes will go up to pay for it (see my previous posts regarding western Penna. school districts). California created an electric power deathtrap that didn't exist in any other state and now people like you have no choice but to pay. Had deregulation been done right (or not at all), the state would be in a better position.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

Nothing worth doing is easy. If they didn't go through all that heck, they wouldn't be doing business.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

The bells don't want WISPs to take away their customers, if WISPs encourage the bells/cable companies to expand service then this is a good thing.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

As we can see with what's happening in Indiana and Nevada, it not a sure thing that these will pass.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

If I am paying $100 in electric bills and I know that $50 is going to subsidize internet service that I don't use, I would be a bit steamed that my bill couldn't be reduced by $50.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

And the Cubans get exactly what they pay for. Maybe if you bothered to do some research of your own, you would see past the Cuban propaganda machine and learn the facts.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

"You're obviously mistaken. I didn't apologize"

i was giving you the benefit of doubt. you have showed i was mistaken about you being an adult.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

check OK. i know you live in the socialist state of CA but in the rest of the country companies exist to make a profit.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

it is not for you or a government to decide the needs of the private market. the private market determines the needs.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

if a gas station is needed at elm and main then it is up to the private sector to research and discover this. it is not the governments role to compete with the private sector.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

as far as who needs to stop talking "mr brownout", you live in a state that is eyeball deep in debt due to getting involved in the private sector.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

"You realize you can replace "government" with "telcos/cablecos", don't you?"

ahhh, NO. government has elected officials and collect taxes on an involuntary basis.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

telcos/cablecos are companies that are there to make a profit and sell stocks on a voluntary basis. if you do not subscribe to their service, they do not collect money.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

if the government collects a tax that does not mean you are entitled to all services. actually to the contrary, the more taxes you pay the less service you get.

---

said by morbo :

---

you obviously don't know what you're talking about. i suggest you do some research before you open your mouth and look like an idiot.

---

said by morbo :

---

healthcare in cuba is free.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

hahahahahahahahahahahaha

it is so amazing people flee the country in homemade rubber rafts!

hahahahahahahahahahahha

---

said by pnh102 :

---

said by morbo :

---

yes and the health care system in cuba is f-ing amazing. wonder why? not because the private sector stepped up to the plate.

---

LOL! That's only if you have money to pay for the best care available (usually if you're a rich Western tourist). Of course the same thing is true in any country. If you're a poor Cuban though, as most Cubans are, then you get to wait in line at the socialist medical clinic like everyone else. If you're lucky you may get care.

And another thing, what kind of healthcare do you think the refugees fleeing Cuba that are intercepted by the Cubans get?
--
Pissed off at traitorous, ungrateful musicians? Don't just boycott them! Trade their MP3s and really screw them over!
[text was edited by author 2003-03-26 15:24:15]

---

said by JakCrow :

---

You forgot about how the the instate power companies signed on to the deregulation plan with the future hopes of reaping huge profits -after they fulfilled certain requirements- to become full deregulated and allowed to pass costs on to customers.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

Evidence points to the desire to simply gouge California. It didn't matter who was paying the bill.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

Now if you want to talk flawed as in deregulation came about because the power companies wanted huge profits and their large corporate customers wanted cheap power while the individual user was barely considered, I'd agree, but something tells me you're one of those black and white "free market" types.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

It's anecdotal and you imply that's how it will be everywhere, then you go on to say there are private companies for which you can buy power from. Just as you wouldn't buy services from an overpriced, poorly run private company. So what's the problem?

---

said by JakCrow :

---

You do remember the hell Ruby Ranch has to go thru to get to the point they're at now, and the length of time and legal hassle they had to go through, right?

---

said by JakCrow :

---

the bells are encroaching on the WISP market too.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

I expect some kind of lobbying effort by them in the next year or so in an attempt to hurt the small providers in that area as well.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

And it's because of those other municipal services they're able to offer something extra. There's nothing wrong with that.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

The short version is that California decided to cap the amount of money paid by subscribers to electric utilities without capping the amount of money that the utilities paid to resellers. Because of California's wacky environmental laws, among which prevented new power plants from being built to meet increasing demand, the supply of electricity in-state remained constant while demand increased, and because no new in-state generation could occur, PG&E and SCE had to buy energy from out of state at very high prices. Sounds like a major government screw up to me. Granted, a bunch of companies did try to exploit the situation, but once again it is the state government's fault for creating the environment in which this kind of exploitation could take place to begin with.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

A specific example, like the one I cited with PGW is not a generalization. However, a specific example is all that is logically required to disprove your original generalization that municipally run services are inherently better than privately run services.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

Ruby Ranch comes to mind, and then there are also the hundreds of WISPs that are springing up all over the country as well.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

Many municipally run broadband providers rely on some other municipally run service to keep them afloat (e.g., the cable network in Glasgow, KY, relies upon the municipally run power company). If that other service wasn't their to prop up the internet service, where would this money come from? More taxes? On the other side of this coin, how much money could these municipally run services be returning to the ratepayers if they were not involved in subsidizing other non-essential municipal services?

---

said by morbo :

---

yes and the health care system in cuba is f-ing amazing. wonder why? not because the private sector stepped up to the plate.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

some famous men had the same idea...STALIN, LENIN, CASTRO......

---

said by morbo :

---

give me a break. see ENRON and other unethical businesses that drove up the price of electricity by conspiring to keep powerplants offline longer than necessary.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

Because of California's wacky environmental laws

---

said by JakCrow :

---

Do you want the long or short version of the "deregulation" story? You certainly have it wrong, that's for sure.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

And you follow up with what also sounds like a generization. Have some consistancy.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

What are these "many places that have rolled their own broadband without government help"? With the exception of the municipalities that are succeeding, the private sector non-telco/cableco solutions are few and far between.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

And once again, someone such as yourself also overlooks that user fees can provide coverage for municipal services such as broadband without taxing everyone.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

And who created the "deregulated" environment which allowed this to occur, the great state of California of course! Was there accountability? Not exactly, the same people who fubared "deregulation" may or may not still be in office and they haven't fixed it. This is precisely the reason that government shouldn't meddle in these kinds of ventures. We truly deregulated electrical generation here in Penna. as well, and our electric rates have been going down, not up, and you truly do have a choice of providers.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

And be careful about those generalizations. You looks like you're applying your local situation to the every municipality regardless.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

Local governments seem to be doing pretty well with utility services

---

said by JakCrow :

---

just as company run services won't either, and SBC and Comcast have already established their poor track records.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

1st off I state my opinion and you call it whining. if you disagree with me so be it but it is insulting for you to say it is whining. I accept your apology.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

if I understand your point correctly, you are saying that sbc needs to invest in a potentially high risk service that could cost too much money.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

you base this on the fact that they make 2 billion a quarter. the reason they make 2 billion a quarter is because the do not throw their money at high risk investments.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

the main point I am trying to make is that it is not the government's role to get involved with the private market. what is next government gas stations, video stores, food stores, construction companies, clothing stores.........
this sounds familiar. some famous men had the same idea...STALIN, LENIN, CASTRO......

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

lets get this last thing straight. government is government, it does not matter if it is city, local, state, federal. the government has no incentive to ever do anything in an efficient manner.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

Get back to me when you're paying $200/month in electric bills (even with conservation) to a "private" company that literally wants to jack rates up 400% more.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

And be careful about those generalizations. You looks like you're applying your local situation to the every municipality regardless.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

Local governments seem to be doing pretty well with utility services

---

said by JakCrow :

---

just as company run services won't either, and SBC and Comcast have already established their poor track records.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

You can't make a blanket statement out of this. In Philadelphia for example, PGW (Philadelphia Gas Works), the municipally-owned natural gas provider, continues to have numerous financial problems and mismanagement issues. They charge the country's highest rates for natural gas and the city and state government constantly have to pour millions of dollars each year into it to keep it afloat. Certain suburban municipal governments in my area have had problems managing sewage processing. Given this track record, its a perfectly reasonable assessment to believe that the local government can and will fubar this project as well.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

the government has no incentive to ever do anything in an efficient manner.

---

said by JakCrow :

---

Local governments seem to be doing pretty well with utility services

---

said by ib50MbSoon :

---

Leviathan provided an excellent link to a few examples of successful municipal broadband.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

i would also like to note that i posed a question of "can someone show where in the long term the government has done anything efficiently? " and your response is to stop whining.

---

said by mocycler :

---

Like I said...I wish them well and hope they get broadband from somewhere, but the math is still hokey.

You're assuming every household will sign up and pay 75 bucks a pop. The going rate in this area for DSL is $30>$80/month, with the average pretty close to $30.
...

---

said by mocycler :

---

Like I said...I wish them well and hope they get broadband from somewhere, but the math is still hokey.

---

said by mocycler :

---

You're assuming every household will sign up and pay 75 bucks a pop. The going rate in this area for DSL is $30>$80/month, with the average pretty close to $30.

---

said by mocycler :

---

I dunno, man. Can't they find anything better to blow sixty-three million smackers on?

---

said by mocycler :

---

It sure would fill a lot of potholes. Funny...last fall St. Charles rejected a school tax increase. If the municipal broadband thing passes, it would indicate some screwy priorities.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

"Well, if you can stop your whining for 5 minutes, maybe we can watch and see what happens."

so next time sbc requests a state to not force them to share their broadband equipment so they can deploy to a rural area, this will be my response.

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

i would also like to note that i posed a question of "can someone show where in the long term the government has done anything efficiently? " and your response is to stop whining. am i to assume you do not have a response due to your lack of knowledge or your inability to debate?

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

do we really want to start the name calling?

---

said by ib50MbSoon :

---

---

said by BBC4544 :

---

where is the competition with government broadband????

---

said by 2farfromCO7 :

---

ALL MONOPOLIES ARE EVIL.

---

said by mocycler :

---

...
The combined population of these three cities is about 90,000.
...

---