I asked the bills in my wallet about this; they seem fairly stupid.
Maybe a speech impediment or maybe they just don't hear me?
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 10/29/2016 9:50 AM, Lewis Bergman wrote:
Private money can be as stupid as it wants.
On Sat, Oct 29, 2016, 11:48 AM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com
<mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote:
Good thing they didn’t loan people money to build hotels or casinos.
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] *On Behalf Of *Chuck McCown
*Sent:* Saturday, October 29, 2016 11:33 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Ammon City fiber
I think that the Rural Electrification Administration (REA, later
renamed the RUS) was probably the best government program ever
created. You could borrow at 1% or 2%, build a power company or
later a telephone company, and serve unserved people.
Create businesses that would help other businesses flourish. It
was even a profit center for the USDA and until broadband came
along, never had a single default in its entire history.
There were no subsidies. It was a loan program.
A shining example of good things bureaucrats can do.
*From:*Lewis Bergman
*Sent:*Saturday, October 29, 2016 10:11 AM
*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Ammon City fiber
I am confused. I don't know why anyone should get government money
for not doing something or being unable to compete. Of course once
the government gets involved in subsidizing anything it skews the
whole market so it's difficult to get them out.
That lambeth utopia explanation is a great example of why
government should be involved in so few operations.
I have to wonder if the government wouldn't have subsidized rural
electric coop buildouts all those years ago how much farther along
solar would be now. Yea rural folks would be in the dark for forty
years buteverything has a choice.
On Sat, Oct 29, 2016, 10:41 AM Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
Compound question.
They open up market to content providers and others that do
not own
infrastructure in a given area. Similar to the whole CLEC
idea 20 years
ago. But this time the facility owners are not forced to
share, they are
going into it with the idea of sharing. Much greater chance of
good success
than the CLEC experiment.
Great if I am a provider of services, and then I can come into
your area,
compete with you wireless system, using guvmnt provided fiber...
But yes, they compete with private facility owners. Unfairly
so. They must
be able to pull their own weight or it is a double crime.
I remember back in the 1960s, my dad getting "soil bank"
payments for not
farming some of his fields. I think that muni and govt fiber
systems should
do the same thing for the WISPS they are hurting...
-----Original Message-----
From: fiber...@mail.com <mailto:fiber...@mail.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 7:34 AM
To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ammon City fiber
Chuck,
Do you feel government built/owned last mile open acces dark
fiber networks
are a detriment to the market and/or compete with private
companies?
Jared
> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 at 11:37 PM
> From: ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ammon City fiber
>
> From: fiber...@mail.com <mailto:fiber...@mail.com>
> > by government. Arguably water and sewer. I have lived in
cities with
> > two
> > power companies. But all the rest should be done by
commercial
> > providers.
> Why do you draw the line at the utilities and the
infrastructure you
> listed? What makes them so special?
>
> Duplication of public utilities is typically not in the
public's interest.
> Duplicate sewer systems would not give a better value to
anyone. Ditto
> water. Power lines use up lots of public utility easements
and are best
> left to one company serving for that reason. There is only
so much room
> for
> streets.
>
> The same philosophy used to apply to airlines, truck lines,
railroads,
> still
> applies to taxi companies in some areas but most of those
have been
> deregulated and open to competition.
>
> Same thing happened to telecom. It was deregulated to encourage
> competition
> and choice of providers. Allowing government entities to
re-enter that
> market is a reversal of policy as public utilities are
considered quazi
> public entities. Do they want monopolies or do they want
competition...
> If
> they want a free market, they should stay out of it.
>
>
> > More importantly government should never compete with
businesses.
> > They have many unfair advantages.
> What unfair advantages do you feel they have?
>
> They do not pay taxes. Property, personal property, income,
corporate,
> excise etc etc.
> (Ask Bountiful city how much property tax they pay on the
fiber system. )
> They do not pay ROW access fees or impact fees.
> They have the power to tax to finance competition.
> They have the power to limit access to competitors.
> They have the power to grant permits without delay and
without burden.
> They have the ability to market to all residents without
additional
> burden.
> They have the color of government approval on their activities.
> They can force all to participate in funding a business that
by its very
> nature can hurt other businesses and even force them out of
business.
>
>
