On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Levi Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Doran L. Barton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > It is a bit ironic that opponents claim UTOPIA is anti-competitive when it > > will allow any service provider to operate on its network, even Qwest or > > Comcast. > > Well, Qwest and Comcast aren't *just* service providers, they're also > infrastructure providers. They invested vast amounts of money in > infrastructure with the understanding that, if you wanted their > service, you'd have to pay for the use of their infrastructure as > well. UTOPIA clearly competes with them in the infrastructure- > supplying business. > > Is that a bad thing? Well, if you're a hard-line capitalist, you'd > probably have to say that it is, but I think you'd then be wrong. I > think that building and maintaining community infrastructure is a > natural service for a government to perform, if the constituents think > it's a good idea. Yes, there's a hint of socialism to the concept, > and socialism is wrong, but then so is capitalism to some degree. > Just because a system works well in general doesn't mean it applies to > all situations. > > --Levi
Before I get painted out to be anti-UTOPIA, I'd have to say that I agree with Levi's position. Perhaps similar to when the automobile came of age, State and Federal government stepped in to provide infrastructure for this new technology. The interstate highway system created for defense purposes has been a huge boon for our society no doubt. The government made the roads, but didn't start giving away cars. The private sector continued to compete with new cars. Some things (such as public planning and infrastructure) are best guided under the control of a representative government. My point was just to say that the freeway system (or public transportation) would be a better thing to compare to UTOPIA than Universal Health Care. Universal Health Care is begging to be abused by every nervous mother who has a child with the sniffles. Because price isn't a deterrent to avoid unnecessary doctor visits, the only limiting factor will be the tremendous wait times that will accrue. In the end you end up with a system that's clogged, bankrupt (like social security), and worse off than our current one for most citizens. UTOPIA doesn't have the same issues as UHC. Virtually everyone could use the service whenever they want without degrading the service for everyone else. Users of the service must opt in with a fee (ISP fees). There will be competition between ISPs, so cost is bound to go down. And the initial cost for the infrastructure isn't unreasonable. -Bryan /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
