Good thing they didn’t loan people money to build hotels or casinos.
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 11:33 AM To: 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. > >
