Obama: broadband internet access for all!

[NorCal Cat]

Heard on the radio this morning that Obama is promising that as President, he will ensure that every American has broadband access to the internet. Gee...that's great Obama. That's about item number 235 on the list of issues the country needs solved. I'm sure a promise to ensure everyone has a laptop computer in order to use this internet access is next. I can see it now...the soup kitchens will soon be asking "chicken noodle or vegetable, Dell or HP?" As people come to claim their new "right" of internet access. I guess if Hillary is promising savings bonds to every baby, Obama has to try something to buy votes also.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Heard on the radio this morning that Obama is promising that as President, he will ensure that every American has broadband access to the internet. Gee...that's great Obama. That's about item number 235 on the list of issues the country needs solved. I'm sure a promise to ensure everyone has a laptop computer in order to use this internet access is next. I can see it now...the soup kitchens will soon be asking "chicken noodle or vegetable, Dell or HP?" As people come to claim their new "right" of internet access. I guess if Hillary is promising savings bonds to every baby, Obama has to try something to buy votes also.

If America is going to remain atop the economic food chain, this is a necessity. It is good for business, education, and the economy. Many other nations already provide for broadband access for all of their citizens. The US is behind in this regard and would be well-served to catch up.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

If America is going to remain atop the economic food chain, this is a necessity. It is good for business, education, and the economy. Many other nations already provide for broadband access for all of their citizens. The US is behind in this regard and would be well-served to catch up.

Heh, the US is not "behind" at all. One could also say we're "behind" on state-run health care by that standard. Just curious, I wonder how of these generous nations have our GDP and population.

Oh, and please fill me in: who's going to pay for it again?

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

If America is going to remain atop the economic food chain, this is a necessity. It is good for business, education, and the economy. Many other nations already provide for broadband access for all of their citizens. The US is behind in this regard and would be well-served to catch up.

Behind in what regard? Becoming a socialist country? Damn right we are.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Behind in what regard? Becoming a socialist country? Damn right we are.

I cant think of many bill proposals that are going to benefit every segment of society.

In 2003, with our post 9/11 economy still hurting, Bush passed a tax cut for dividends in an effort to increase consumer spending. Well, obviously that didnt really work as intended because so many people that make up our consumer base do not even receive dividends. It was basically something that benefitted the rich, not the poor.

Was it a bad idea because it didnt benefit or apply to everyone? I dont think necessarily so. taxes on dividends and cap gains are too high, in my opinion.

With Obama's broadband platform, of course in practicum it doesnt mean he is going to buy everyone a computer. He is trying to propose a way for us to match some Euro cities and countries that make free wi-fi in populated areas fairly standard, thereby making it "available to all." Why would this be a bad idea?

[venomous viper]

it will be a contest to see which candidate can promise the most freebies,,, paid for by the remaining 40% in the U.S. that already pay 99.1% of ALL income taxes.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

I cant think of many bill proposals that are going to benefit every segment of society.

In 2003, with our post 9/11 economy still hurting, Bush passed a tax cut for dividends in an effort to increase consumer spending. Well, obviously that didnt really work as intended because so many people that make up our consumer base do not even receive dividends. It was basically something that benefitted the rich, not the poor.

Was it a bad idea because it didnt benefit or apply to everyone? I dont think necessarily so. taxes on dividends and cap gains are too high, in my opinion.

With Obama's broadband platform, of course in practicum it doesnt mean he is going to buy everyone a computer. He is trying to propose a way for us to match some Euro cities and countries that make free wi-fi in populated areas fairly standard, thereby making it "available to all." Why would this be a bad idea?

Yeah, the Bush tax cuts of 2003 didn't work, as evidenced by the horrible economy of 2003-2006, right? (that's called sarcasm). Dividend cuts were part of an overall tax cut strategy. I don't know what you consider "rich," but there are millions of people that get dividend payments every year. I do, and I ain't rich.

My comment about providing everyone a free laptop was SOMEWHAT TIC, but I guarantee you that's what people will be calling for next.

I didn't say anything is wrong with free wi-fi in populated areas! We already have it here. It's already happening, being driven by local governments in conjunction with private enterprise. My point is the government should NOT be providing and/or paying for everyone's internet access!

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Yeah, the Bush tax cuts of 2003 didn't work, as evidenced by the horrible economy of 2003-2006, right? (that's called sarcasm). Dividend cuts were part of an overall tax cut strategy. I don't know what you consider "rich," but there are millions of people that get dividend payments every year. I do, and I ain't rich.

My comment about providing everyone a free laptop was SOMEWHAT TIC, but I guarantee you that's what people will be calling for next.

I didn't say anything is wrong with free wi-fi in populated areas! We already have it here. It's already happening, being driven by local governments in conjunction with private enterprise. My point is the government should NOT be providing and/or paying for everyone's internet access!

Clasic. Your post was SOMEWHAT TIC (thanks for the caps on that one), followed by your "guarantee" that it will happen. I think you may need to brush up on the TIC meaning.

Obama didn't say the government was going to pay for it. He said he would ensure it was available to everyone. Private enterprise is making this a reality in many cities already (ala San Francisco). Corporations have proven that they are far more than willing to foot the bill to put in wifi in many cities where they have received cooperation from local governments. He is simply promising the support of the federal government.

The US IS behind in wifi technology. Far behind. You can whine and say "yeah, but they are socialist!" But it doesn't change the fact that they are beating our socks off in that area. Wifi is good for everyone. So why shouldn't we want it for everyone as a matter of national policy?

Oh, and I do love the hypocrisy of saying that this is "buying votes" (when he hasn't promised to fund it in the first place), but cutting taxes isn't the same thing- right?

Pray tell- what is the difference? I know you support a candidate who promises to cut taxes.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by venomous viper

it will be a contest to see which candidate can promise the most freebies,,, paid for by the remaining 40% in the U.S. that already pay 99.1% of ALL income taxes.

I guess we shouldn't promise to cut taxes then, since that is the equivalent of offering a "freebie."

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Yeah, the Bush tax cuts of 2003 didn't work, as evidenced by the horrible economy of 2003-2006, right? (that's called sarcasm). Dividend cuts were part of an overall tax cut strategy. I don't know what you consider "rich," but there are millions of people that get dividend payments every year. I do, and I ain't rich.

My comment about providing everyone a free laptop was SOMEWHAT TIC, but I guarantee you that's what people will be calling for next.

I didn't say anything is wrong with free wi-fi in populated areas! We already have it here. It's already happening, being driven by local governments in conjunction with private enterprise. My point is the government should NOT be providing and/or paying for everyone's internet access!

I noticed how you conveniently stopped at 2006, which is right around the time the paper tiger of 2003-2006 started to crumble and reveal itself.

I agree that millions of people get dividend payments each year. unfortunately, over 100 million pay taxes. I enjoyed the divided tax cut personally, but I dont pretend it really only benefited to more wealthy amongst us. It still doesnt make it a bad idea. Obama's idea for broadband signal towers or inside building structures isnt even really progressive...it is already being done outside the US. If anything, he is trying to get us to catch up.

I view building out a tech infrastructure similarly to building roads.