On Sat, Oct 29, 2016, 3:18 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > Lewis Bergman wrote: > > I understand the attractiveness of the big government to solve a problem. > In all fairness, we are talking about fairly small projects done by > local governments. It's not like there is a Big Bad Fiber Network being > built by the Feds. >
Government is rarely small at the level where it competes with an enterprise, be it local or otherwise. > > It just always that is a fairly poor short term solution and an even > worse long term one that always serves > > to stifle innovationand extend the life of entities that should already > be out of business. > Sorry, lost me there. What are we taking about? > My apologies. Railing against government as a solution instead of the pariah it normally turns out it to be. Maybe not to those getting the great free or reduced stuff but definitely to those paying for it. > I live in a rural area but don't think I deserve a great hospital 5 > minutes from my house or fiber or a great > > many conveniences > You can have what you pay for. > A great hospital might be stretching it, but why should you not have > fiber? > Because I have run the numbers myself and performed the market research. The average person in my community is unwilling to pay enough to recoup the investment in an acceptable time-frame. That being the case, why is it someone else's responsibility to pay for what our community is unwilling to pay? I want a Bugatti but I don't think you should get me one. Jared >
