Lewis Bergman wrote: > Government is rarely small at the level where it competes with an enterprise, > be it local or otherwise. You are kidding me, right?
Have you seen the size of Comcast? > 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'd say there are the odd successes too. Some even mentioned in this thread. Clear societal benefits no less, without any cost to the government. > 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? It's not. I'm not advocating for freebies. All I'm saying is that if a community is willing to pay for it, it should be allowed to have fiber. That being said, I'm not opposed to spending tax dollars on projects where there is no direct financial return from the local population, but from which society as a whole benefits from. Whether fiber networks fall into this category is debatable. Jared
