At 7/13/2010 11:52 AM, RickG wrote: >You beat me to it Mark. In the end, history will show that the "free >government money attitude" is what was at the root of our country's >downfall. Most WISP's are built on independance. We should fight >against the use of our tax dollars for all these wasteful programs. I >think all other utilities should be made to stand on their own as >well. What better way to show that it works than by our own example?
I'm less opposed to USF in principle, if it were properly run (which it isn't), noting two factors. 1) It really is expensive to bring service to some places, and having people "on the network", even POTS, makes the network more useful for everyone. 2) Rural states have two senators each, and they demanded it, so we're stuck. Given that realpolitik, the correct answer is for USF to be more carefully targeted. Right now the RLEC is encouraged to waste money, building gold-plated networks and large organizations to support few customers. Wireless loops are not considered a viable option, except for the most extreme cases, and the FCC has almost no spectrum (BETRS anyone?) for it. USF comes from one bureau (WCB) and spectrum another (WTB) and they seem to like and want to help each other about as much as the two Koreas do. This can only be fixed at the top; WTB was Not Interested: http://www.ionary.com/ion-FCC-comments.html One of the pending proposals is for USF to be auctioned off, so that the low bidder gets the USF support for a given area. This sounds nice in practice, since anyone on this list could design and run a high-quality network for a fraction of what TDS, CenturyTel, or your local mom'n'pop RLEC spends. But the RLECs are mostly financed by RUS debt, paid off by USF. (Two government agencies doing a tango.) Would RUS really want its debtholders shut down? Guess who holds that bag! But before you rail against government money in general, bear in mind that it is mostly rural folks who yell stuff like, "keep the government's hands off of my farm subsidies!". We city folk are on the giving end. >On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:14 AM, MDK <rea...@muddyfrogwater.us> wrote: > > If you did, how would you sleep at night, knowing you're ripping off money > > for nuttin? > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy > > 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > From: "Glenn Kelley" <gl...@hostmedic.com> > > Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 8:39 PM > > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rural Telco in Washington Gets $17,763 per line > > > >> That was my question. > >> > >> I would love to find a way to get $300K to build a number of towers > >> around - and then a few thousand per subscriber per year to give them VOIP > >> and Internet... > >> > >> - but then again I guess we all would > >> > >> Something however for us to use perhaps as Fodder to show why we should - > >> when we can service so many more. > >> > >> > >> On Jul 12, 2010, at 11:36 PM, Jack Unger wrote: > >> > >>> WISPs get a share of the USF funds that will be redirected to broadband? > >>> Noodle me that... > >> > >> > >> -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
