"Funny, when you think about it, it seems that government often has had a role in building (or kickstarting) previous networks. Think water, sewer, bus, cable, phone(?), electric(?). Why do I suspect that the current minimal (anti-?) government climate will cause us to miss this opportunity?"
Because government wouldn't be government if it weren't constantly looking for things to tax and regulate. Notice that none of the examples you mentioned were invented or created by government. They only butted in so they could control its distribution for the purposes of regulation and taxation in in the name of "the people." Government's view of the economy: "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidise it." - Ronald Reagan Dennis Tester Mac-Groveland >----- ------- Original Message ------- ----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], stpaul@mnforum.org >Sent: Tue, 3 May 2005 -0700 (PDT) 12:10:35 > > >---snip--- >> Wouldn't it be better to join with Minneapolis >and >> create a single system with a single payment that > >> will work in both places? >> Charlie Swope >> Ward 1 >> > >Charlie, (replying to a direct message) > >Your point is right on. > >What we're building is a network. Metcalf's law >states that the value (or "power") of a network >increases in proportion to the square of the number >of >nodes on that network. [Its worth mentioning that >this is a rule-of-thumb kind of law like Moore's >law >(processor speeds (density) double every 18 months) > >rather than a law of physics.] As an example, >compare >the Internet to old-style AOL or Compuserve. The >Internet was open and had more nodes (think web >addresses) and quickly overwhelmed the closed off >subscriber-only AOL. So a network that includes >Mpls >& St. Paul is "worth more" than 2 separate >networks. > >If only there was a regional governmental body that > >spanned the whole Twin Cities metro area. Ideally, > >that body would have experience building and >maintaining a network of some kind. Funny, when >you >think about it, it seems that government often has >had >a role in building (or kickstarting) previous >networks. Think water, sewer, bus, cable, >phone(?), >electric(?). Why do I suspect that the current >minimal (anti-?) government climate will cause us >to >miss this opportunity? > >Kevin >Frogtown W1P4 > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam >protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >------------------------------------------------- >JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY: > http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/ >------------------------------------------------- >POST MESSAGES HERE: stpaul@mnforum.org > >To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your >password - visit: >http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul > >Archive Address: > http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/ ------------------------------------------------- JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY: http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/ ------------------------------------------------- POST MESSAGES HERE: stpaul@mnforum.org To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
