Posted on 04/03/2014 2:26:07 PM PDT by ThethoughtsofGreg
A new bill seeking to curb Utah’s government-owned broadband networks incited anger among observers, indicating confusion remains regarding the policy—and the state of broadband.
Promoting broadband is in the public interest, but government-run broadband networks like Utah Telecommunications Open Infrastructure Agency—termed UTOPIA—are not the way to broadband paradise.
In 2002, local government leaders commenced work on UTOPIA—the nation’s largest government-owned wholesale fiber operation—as a reaction to private telecommunications providers’ supposed unwillingness to make available high-speed broadband services. Altogether, 11 communities pledged approximately $500 million over several decades to back the bonds UTOPIA sold to finance network development. However, UTOPIA never overcame initial hurdles and currently serves only 10,000 customers while nursing $215 million in debt.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanlegislator.org ...
Isn’t that supposedly a conservative state?
Is there something not-conservative about attempting to bypass Big Business when they have a monopoly or near-monopoly?
It’s socialism, pure and simple and yes that is not conservative
Liberals invade Utah (as other communities) through universities.
I suppose you’d prefer that the US never passed anti-trust legislation or regulated utilities, too.
Broadband access is just another form of infrastructure. It’s no more socialistic to have governments providing Internet infrastructure than it is for a government to provide infrastructure in the form of roads and bridges.
It is socialism by definition
Socialism: a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies
Full Definition of SOCIALISM
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
Sorry, doesn’t look like socialism to me. Providing infrastructure is not the government owning the means of production, the abolition of private property, nor the government owning major industries without a private sector alternative.
Yes. How was the monopoly obtained?
I do prefer that anti-trust legislation had never passed. It’s hurt America. Plus, utility regulation has just become regulatory capture. What good is that?
Who said Utah can't play in the "big leagues"?
The numbers may be small, but per capita this can rival the best of California, Illinois, or New York State.
Cutthroat business practices, driving competitors out of business with arbitrarily low prices, among other things.
I do prefer that anti-trust legislation had never passed. It’s hurt America. Plus, utility regulation has just become regulatory capture. What good is that?
Honestly, I hate utility regulation precisely because it is a government-sanctioned monopoly. That's what cable companies like Comcast have in many areas, but they aren't really even regulated like a utility.
Out of curiosity, why do you think anti-trust legislation has hurt America? If it increases competition (which was the goal in breaking monopolies), that seems like a good thing.
Correction: I should say "artificially low prices."
The cable companies and local politicians have had a nice “mutualy beneficial” relationship since the birth of cable tv. Especially in large cities. Satellite was cutting into this a fair amount, but the advent of the internet and consumer desire for broadband pretty much saved their bacon, at least for now.
In the marketplace the consumer is king. Low prices, not matter how “arbitrary” or “cutthroat” are good for consumers. It matters, though, how the monopoly is obtained. If it is through normal competition including “cutthroat” then it is OK. If it is by law or via government action, then a monopoly isn’t natural and isn’t OK.
Take a here: http://www.amazon.com/The-Myth-Robber-Barons-Business/dp/0963020315
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Vw6uF2LdZw
We’ve been fed a pack of lies about Standard Oil and Vanderbilt and a bunch of these so called robber barons. Some were just tough competitors who delivered superior products for less. Vanderbilt let you ride free on his steamboats to work every morning. He made up for it by allowing gambling and selling food. Nobody was forced to gamble or eat, but the profits from those two endeavors allowed him to drop his ticket price to $0.00.
Government schooling is pro-government. The history is there, but we don’t get taught it. Instead we get the progressive’s lie machine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.