Obama: broadband internet access for all!

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Yes, that is my primary complaint. Let's see if talking about this becomes a habit for him on is stump speeches. Also, it is my complaint about Dems in general. It's a race to see who can promise the most freebies.

ok, well then if that truly is your primary complaing, what are you bothered about? Obama has never said it was one of the more pressing issues. in fact, has any candidate?

it seems like you are actually are on the same page as Obama.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Or- why don't we compare wifi since that is what we are discussing? I suppose we could compare who has the best flowers too, but I don't see how it would be helpful either.

Examples: Asia and Western Europe. Beating our socks off. If you don't agree, then you simply need to do some research.

Our wifi is woefully behind that of many other industrialized nations. And it isn't a matter of the government paying for the infrastructure to be built here. Private enterprise is shouldering much of the responsibility because they are quickly learning that it is very profitable for them to do so. There is a reason Google wants to give people wifi for free.

Private enterprise needs a willing partner in the government. Cities like San Fransisco have jumped on that bandwagon, to their benefit.

We are willing to pay for highways because they are good for the nation for defense and commerce. Wifi isn't much different- and the government doesn't even have to foot the bill for most of America. This is a common-sense idea that Obama has presented.

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Obama's plan allows for this very thing to happen. He hasnt said the government will pay for it for everyone.

The market has largely already dictated coverage maps. Broadband will use the same broadcast towers as already exist for GSM and CDMA cellular. There will be little change to coverage maps as a result of new broadband demand. Cellular phone demand will shape new tower placement much more drastically than broadband demand.

So tell me again ... if the gov't isn't getting involved financially, what exactly is it doing to "lend support"?

If all Obama is advocating is passing a few laws permitting companies to offer wi-fi wherever they want, for whatever price they want, then by all means. The less gov't involved the better.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Are you really a cat? Or should I assume you are a person who just wants to be a cat?

You never got back to me on how this is any different than promising a tax cut (which you would favor). And keep in mind Obama hasn't even promised he will spend money on this initiative (or that it is his first priority). Basically, keep in mind that your only stated complaints so far are ones you have imagined and then extrapolated into the government buying everyone a laptop (and then a rocketship?).

Yes I did. Go back and read again.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Tex

So tell me again ... if the gov't isn't getting involved financially, what exactly is it doing to "lend support"?

If all Obama is advocating is passing a few laws permitting companies to offer wi-fi wherever they want, for whatever price they want, then by all means. The less gov't involved the better.

Even if the gov creates a tax to accomplish this, I am all for it.

While they are at it, I wish they would create a tax that would help subsidize my xbox live annual membership, too.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Even if the gov creates a tax to accomplish this, I am all for it.

While they are at it, I wish they would create a tax that would help subsidize my xbox live annual membership, too.

Ahem.

Originally Posted by Tex

Porsche's are good for everyone too. So are $150,000-a-year paying jobs. Shouldn't we want it for everyone as a matter of national policy?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Talk about a straw man.

It's not a straw man.

"Isn't it great? Shouldn't we want it for everyone?" is not sufficient reason to get the gov't involved, as my example illustrates. And anyway, you elected not to express what "support from the gov't" means (TripletDaddy finally admitted it'll probably mean a tax increase).

Almost anytime the gov't "supports" anything, we're talking about tax money. Get out of the way of private enterprise, says I.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Tex

It's not a straw man.

"Isn't it great? Shouldn't we want it for everyone?" is not sufficient reason to get the gov't involved, as my example illustrates. And anyway, you elected not to express what "support from the gov't" means (TripletDaddy finally admitted it'll probably mean a tax increase).

Almost anytime the gov't "supports" anything, we're talking about tax money. Get out of the way of private enterprise, says I.

I said several posts back that I am fine with it if it is an increase.

no need to get nasty!

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

No- you didn't. The question was why you don't consider both to be buying votes, not why you consider one to be better than the other.

Proposing to cut taxes is not buying votes, because the government is not giving anyone something they don't already have, or giving anyone anything for free. They are letting me keep the money I EARNED. Hillary is just buying votes by saying vote for me and I will give you X, without having done anything to earn it yourself.

[ChinoCoug]

Broadband Access per capita

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/in...ess-per-capita

#1 Korea, South: 2.466 per 10 people
#2 Hong Kong: 2.335 per 10 people
#3 Netherlands: 2.334 per 10 people
#4 Denmark: 2.255 per 10 people
#5 Switzerland: 2.07 per 10 people
#6 Canada: 1.93 per 10 people
#7 Norway: 1.925 per 10 people
#8 Finland: 1.92 per 10 people
#9 Sweden: 1.868 per 10 people
#10 Taiwan: 1.841 per 10 people
#11 Israel: 1.824 per 10 people
#12 Belgium: 1.792 per 10 people
#13 Japan: 1.641 per 10 people
#14 France: 1.472 per 10 people
#15 United Kingdom: 1.466 per 10 people
#16 United States: 1.382 per 10 people
#17 Austria: 1.305 per 10 people
#18 Australia: 1.177 per 10 people
#19 Spain: 1.087 per 10 people
#20 Portugal: 1.087 per 10 people

[ChinoCoug]

Yo ideologues:

Even Romney recognizes the government has a role in investing in Research and Development

"In technology, we as a country already invest an enormous amount--for instance, in defense technology, space technology, health--but we also need to invest in some of the emerging technologies that are important at a basic science level such as fuel cell technology, power generation, materials science, automotive technology. We have to recognize that where we invest as a nation, both from a government standpoint but also from a private standpoint, those are the areas we've been most successful."

http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/Technology