Gunslinger03
join:2004-07-09
Chesapeake, VA
| reply to Minister
Re: Isn't it obvious?
said by Minister  :Smaller government is more manageable and more directly accountable. I agree. So why make it larger by giving it the power over a broadband network?
said by Minister :Also, if they're competing with SBC, they'll be less influenced by their lobbyists because loyalties will lie elsewhere (like to the people) They problem is they cannot compete. This is because they are funded by the taxpayer who has little recourse--and because they have the money of the taxpayer they are not forced into being innovative. They can bury costs of rollout, upgrade, and maintenance in your taxes. Sure you can vote them out, but if a crooked politician has enough money they will get in office. |
|
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | reply to Gunslinger03
Smaller government is more manageable and more directly accountable.
Also, if they're competing with SBC, they'll be less influenced by their lobbyists because loyalties will lie elsewhere (like to the people) |
|
Gunslinger03
join:2004-07-09
Chesapeake, VA | reply to lyls
So if the big corporations have such a big influence on government, why again would you want this corrupt government running your broadband network? |
|
lyls
@tele.dk
| reply to SpitefulCrow
of course he would.... with a name like gunslinger its not very likely that he would EVER be able to admit that he might have spoken too soon  i think muni broadband sounds fine and its kinda sad to see the big corporations have such big influence on politics that they can get them to actually ban muni broadband when they dont even want to serve them anyway |
|
SpitefulCrow
Insert Witty Tag Here
Premium
join:2003-06-04
Berkeley, CA
| reply to Gunslinger03
said by Gunslinger03 :How is a muni going to cover costs by rolling out a billion dollar network in an unsuitable area? How is the muni going to adapt? And if the muni ever did make a profit, would you see a dime of it? I am aware governments bail out private ventures, and that is yet another unfortunate example of how they abuse their power. We could go on for days about the wasteful bailouts politicians give whenever it is time to grandstand or buy votes. Define an "unsuitable area."
Then, would you have opposed government aid in rolling out POTS copper to these areas 100 years ago? |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
 ·LINGO
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·surpasshosting
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Gunslinger03
said by Gunslinger03 :And if the muni ever did make a profit, would you see a dime of it? Of course not! If a muni is making a profit, and they've already paid back the bonds, covered current costs and future investments, then the next step is lower prices. |
|
Gunslinger03
join:2004-07-09
Chesapeake, VA
| reply to JTRockville
How is a muni going to cover costs by rolling out a billion dollar network in an unsuitable area? How is the muni going to adapt? And if the muni ever did make a profit, would you see a dime of it?
I am aware governments bail out private ventures, and that is yet another unfortunate example of how they abuse their power. We could go on for days about the wasteful bailouts politicians give whenever it is time to grandstand or buy votes. |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
·LINGO
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·surpasshosting
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Minister
Don't forget: the purpose of a muni is to provide service and cover costs. Contrary to private corporation assessments, a muni that does not show a profit is not a failure, as long as the muni is able to cover costs and pay back bonds.
By the way, governments sometimes bail out private ventures, and taxpayers sometimes subsidize private ventures. |
|
