$6 Billion Proposal For High-Speed Internet Grants 280
witherstaff writes "House Democrats have proposed $6 billion in Internet investmentsas part of a sweeping economic stimulus bill that the full House is expected to vote on next week. The $6 billion is considered a down payment on efforts Obama will make in this area over the next several years. Of course let's not forget the $200 billion broadband scandal that the large telecommunication companies have been paid but never delivered on."
Yes, let's not forget ... (Score:5, Interesting)
So, now AT&T U-Verse is in the area (I'm switching: I'm about fifty feet from the local VRAD box and I'm shooting for the 18 Mbit/sec tier
Don't let the FCC fool you
Re:And the oversight? (Score:3, Interesting)
If the oversight committee was a total of 5 people with backgrounds in actual accounting that ended up costing $1 million a year, but prevented the "loss" of billions in funding, I'd say it was money well spent.
Sadly, the government does indeed pay millions a year to CPAs and other professionals that actually find out where all the money is going and how much is lost each year. It's just that nothing is done about it.
Posting Anon for obvious reasons.
Get the providers out of the last mile (Score:5, Interesting)
We need to get the providers out of the last mile. Any new housing developments, larger than 20 homes, should be required to star wire single mode fiber to all homes from a common equipment vault. Let the providers give access at that point and contribute to a local maintenance pool.
Re:Ahh ... the generosity (Score:3, Interesting)
>You WANT something like that? Remember what happened whenever the government started giving grants to modernize America with phone lines? The AT&T monopoly was formed.
Yes, I think we need another monopoly like that. Because basic research is a huge tragedy of the commons problem, you need a big monopoly that *is* the commons. When AT&T was, they were able to create one of the best research labs ever and invented the transistor which has accelerated human development at exponential speeds.
Re:Verizon Fios cherrypicking (Score:5, Interesting)
As noted in another post, the physical plant (fiber, copper, wet string, etc.) shouldn't be a sanctioned monopoly, but should rather be a municipal resource. If you can't stomach that, then require universal access for services. Enforce that. If you're offering FIOS in the state, Verizon should be obligated to deploy it to *any* customer who orders it. If Verizon squeals, tell them to stop using the government-mandated right-of-way access through private property.
A final note - one of the reasons this issue torques me so much is that Verizon has run fiber through my yard. They're more than willing to expect right-of-way through my property, but they steadfastly refuse to provide me with a service I'm more than willing to pay for. The State mandates that I allow this, so I don't have any recourse short of getting elected Governor. And before you comment that I get indirect benefit from the fiber, no I don't. The fiber in question isn't a backbone, it's a last-mile bundle installed to service another community.
Cry me a F*ing river (Score:2, Interesting)
Western MA has been getting screwed by Boston since before there even was a United States of America.
Western MA, didn't want to ratify the consitution so the politicians in Boston redrew the district lines.
We footed the bill for the majority of the MA turnpike and had to fight for 5 years to get the tolls removed from our end, which was promised when they first started construction.
how much does Westfield, Springfield, Holyoke, Chicopee, etc. benefit from burying the highway in downtown Boston? Hell, since all of the contractors and politicians involved are from east of Worchester, we didn't even get our share of the kickbacks.
Far more tax money is spent in and around Boston than is actually collected from there. All that graft, and public works money is collected from the whole state and spent in your back yard. So forgive me if I don't feel sorry for you that you have to deal with the same ISP that my parents have, but have a slower connection. If you are running a business out of your house, shell out the $50 each month b/c I can guarantee you lose more money when they cut you off then you save by gaming their system.
Re:Nationalise the networks (Score:4, Interesting)
Telecom is NOT a natural monopoly.
This is true, but the intent of the original poster is easy to understand. It's a problem to put in lots of competing wires because every time someone digs they risk breaking already laid wires. Every time someone strings wires it reduces the reliability of all the others because the weakest wires fall first and damage others. Almost everywhere there are laws restricting the laying of wires to one phone one cable and one power because it does solve a lot of problems. It's not a natural monopoly in the traditional sense, but neither does it invalidate the point.
Re:Subject (Score:2, Interesting)
Now you see the difference between political Rhetoric and political Reality. They were only opposed to the spending b/c it was not being spent on their pet projects
Here's what I see:
(A) $12 billion a month to kill, destroy, and rebuild in Iraq to no discernible purpose.
versus
(B) $6 billion to start expanding the infrastructure of our own country for a competitive future.
Not being Republican or retarded - large population overlap noted - I'll take (B).
Re:Subject (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh right, I forgot that now that you are out of power you are all such concerned fiscal conservatives again. LOL
The analogy is more like: Dad just pissed all our money away but if I take a college loan and use it wisely I can still have a prosperous future.
The $6 billion is 1/100th of what has been spent on the war, not including the 1.5 trillion yet to come in military medical costs, equipment replacement, etc.
There is plenty in the stimulus plan that can be justifiably labeled pork. Considering the importance of a networked future and with places like South Korea, Japan, etc., far ahead of us, this is a trivial amount of REAL investment. Don't be short sighted.
Dear Politicians (Score:5, Interesting)
Dear Politicians,
I work for a small, but growing, ISP, so bear with me, as this subject annoys me to no end. Not every problem can be solved by simply throwing a bunch of money at it and hoping for the best. All the wrong people are going to end up with that money, either corrupt individuals, or large carriers who are more interested in squelching small competition so they can continue to shaft their customers left and right. They don't want to improve, improvements cost money, big cable wants to maintain the status quo. Either way, none of this money is going to be used to service undeserved areas. Keep the money, please, don't give anyone a single dime.
You say you want to see internet delivered to the undeserved? Have you looked around? Some of us are doing just that. We are using part-15 spectrum to deliver 5+ megabit service to residents with no cable or DSL service available. Do you know what part-15 of the spectrum is, in reality? It is the useless chunks of the airspace that no one else wanted, 900 mhz, 2.4 ghz, 5.8 ghz, and a few others. Despite the severe limitations imposed on us all by the FCC, we have delivered magic to customers and businesses in these so called undeserved areas. We have used the crap airwaves no one else wanted, served the customers that big telco called profitless, and we are financially solvent. Keep the money, we don't need it, and the big companies don't deserve it.
So, I hear this tremendously useful band of data is going to be free from use soon, and that its fate is largely undecided. I have already mentioned that we have taken some of the worst air space in existence, and delivered an amazing service to our customers. What do you suppose would happen if you let us use that band to deliver broadband? Interference free, crystal clear transmissions of a massive amount of data to every nearly home that wanted it, Keep the money, give us the spectrum.
So you want to see the entire nation lit up on the broadband map, who do you think is going to do that? Verizon? Comcast? AT&T? If they could have, they would have done it by now, lord knows, you have thrown enough cash at the big players already, and I still get phone calls from happy new customers, glad to have service, because no one else offered it. No, broadband is going to come from the small business, there are thousands of us out there, we call ourselves WISPs, and we are doing what the Bells have told you cannot be done: We brought broadband to rural America. We have delivered affordable, quality service with a smile, with the worst tools we had to use. Now, imagine what we could do if we had 700 mhz. I am not asking you to give it to just me, I am not asking you to hand it over to only small companies, no, let all internet service providers have a fair crack at 700 mhz, and watch us deliver. Let Capitalism rear its blind, careless head, and watch the strong survive, and the weak fall. I already know I can win my own spot in the national broadband market, because I have been beating the telecom giants at their own game for 5 years, and winning. Keep the money, give us 700 mhz!
Re:Subject (Score:3, Interesting)
They're not going to go away
That's a defeatist attitude. My intent is to help make them go away - at least, in the coercive form of which we are all familiar.
so the least one might ask is that they not be spent wastefully.
But they must by definition be spent wastefully. Unless the government succeeds in fooling everyone all the time, there will always be market pressure to counteract the intended purpose of a tax-funded project (at least if that purpose is to sway the economy), with the end result being worse than before. As for those projects not directly intended to sway the economy, they must inevitably lead to a monopoly in one form or another, resulting in less efficiency, higher prices, and more waste.