... so corps can maintain their rip-off cartel
Open Letter to North Carolina Gov. Bev Perdue: Support Community Broadband
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawren...tml?view=print
Purdue's/Repug bull reasoning? Can't let little rural communities, (democratically operating, self-reliant, independent, seizing the initiative) bully the autocratic, hyper-rich mega-corps:
"There is a need to establish rules to prevent cities and towns from having an unfair advantage over providers in the private sector"
http://stopthecap.com/2011/05/20/bre...she-wanted-to/
This NC situation exposes a fundamental, hidden VRWC/Repug strategy: limit/trash govt, any govt, even local self-government, and make people dependent on for-profit corps. That strategy is the entire thrust of Ryan's sick-care reform.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 05-22-2011 at 10:01 AM.
U.S. lagging in broadband adoption, speed: FCC report
the United States ranked ninth out of 29 countries for mobile broadband adoption on a per capita basis, and 12th out of 33 countries for percentage of households with fixed broadband
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...74J7D920110521
United Kingdom, South Korea and Iceland were among countries to top the United States' 63 percent broadband adoption rate.
How many times now are you wishing for legislators to either subsidize providers, or push the out?
Why are you so supportive of government supported monopolies and oligopolies, WC?
I don't. Any time I have seen similar legislation, the law makers are either subsidizing with other peoples money, or pushing regulations counterproductive to profit. No profit, no motivation to innovate.
It's clear you don't realize you do.Fixed.No compe ion, no motivation to innovate.
Isn't this the same bill we debated earlier?
Anyone see the vote?
84:32 in the house and 39:10 in the senate.
Remember, it does allow government subsidies to areas that broadband companies have no good coverage in. Don't you get it, it's an anti-subsidy bill. Those of you who disapprove of this bill, I bet don't approve of subsidies to the energy industry.
Read the text, here's the ratified version:
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 05-22-2011 at 04:21 PM.
"anti-subsidy bill"
It stops communities from providing their own Internet access.
where does the forbidden, nasty tax money come from?
Government created oligopolies must be preserved at all costs.
From those of us who already pay too much in taxes and want to pay less.
If you say so.
I would like to see more compe ion, but not by the government.
What innovations are cable and phone companies working on for internet in rural NC?
typical WC mealy-mouthed, weasal-ly non-answer.
If the communities pay increased local taxes to finance their own Internet, that's wonderful socialism at work.
If they use USF money to build Internet, that's nothing new. Red-state, rural bubbas have been benefitting for decades from having their telephone, and now Internet, service paid for by everybody else. That's wonderful socialism at work
Since these communities don't have bb Internet already, or have a really ty bb Internet, it's because, as with rural telephony, uneconomical for private, capitalistic companies to provide it.
Hard to claim that the PO utility is 'competing' with the private sector ones when the private sector doesn't even offer comparable products. The only overlapping tier is the highest TWC cable speed (10 MBps) which matches the lowest tier of the PO utility.
Furthermore, I don't hear residents in the affected NC areas complaining about their taxes being used inappropriately in this venture. I only hear ing from some dude in Portland, OR.
WC is an authoritarian who doesn't believe in local government.
Experience.
Downtown Portland had free wireless internet for a while before they couldn't subsidize it any longer, hurting us in the process building the infrastructure.
This was also a city counsel decision. Not a decision of the tax payers by vote.
Because Portland is rural North Carolina, and the city council is not democratically elected.
How did it hurt you building the infrastructure? I'm sure the infrastructure is still in use today. Did the private sector had an interest building the infrastructure in the first place?
Again, I don't see the NC voters in the affected areas up in arms about this. Do you?
A brief history of a failed subsidized service:
Citywide WiFi comes to Portland
Portland's "Free-Internet" Provider, MetroFi, Bites The Dust
At least a private network is being established:
As free Wi-Fi blinks out in Portland, Ore., paid wireless expands
You haven't answered this, WC.
They can move to a different state if they don't like the protection of jobs in that state.
Can you say States Rights?
Like it or not, the legislators saw a clear interference with a for profit business. You can disagree with them if you want, but the vote was almost 80%.
you really swallow all the talking points eagerly, don't you. And you try to call other people lemmings.
You already proved you don't believe in local government.Can you say States Rights?
They were bought off by cable and phone lobbyists. For profit business is already interfered with by the oligopolies and the governments that put them in place. And you are their useful idiot.Like it or not, the legislators saw a clear interference with a for profit business. You can disagree with them if you want, but the vote was almost 80%.
Wow...
If you have evidence of that corruption, we need to see that!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
